Respect for all

[rick48]

Yes, that's crazy how they label people as anti-CI while they are not. This proves how much Rick48 and other people identify CI with oralism, and how tight the connections between those two subjects are to some parents here.

What's true, is that I am one of probably less than 10 people that have declared them anti-CI on this forum, and I am proud of it as it makes me unique

flip meet dd and vica versa, go ahead and have at it. You two are experts at this argument, you really don't need any of us.

We'll be eating our blizzards!

 

[rick48]

I agree somewhat you say. However, I've read some posts that the facts aren't true, and they spread around that CI is no good. That pisses me off that they're spreading stuff that aren't even true.

They would say stuff like, CI should never be implanted on children, CI sucks, Poor to those people who were ex-CIers, etc...then they don't back up their facts. There are posts that says "Why implant kids? Accept their deafness? who cares HA doesn't help. Use ASL. Don't use oral methods. CI destroys Deaf culture, etc" among those lines. THOSE people I call anti-ci because they won't accept the fact that CI is helpful for SOME people. I've always said that CI is not for everyone, and it's all based on personal choices (majority about parents implanting their children)

I'm sorry for those people who did not do the research beforehand (like many parents who implanted their children and thinking that they will be hearing, or adults with high expectations, etc), or the implant didn't work for them for various reasons (lack of training, bad surgery, bad implant, or as simple as it just doesn't work for them).

It's okay if people don't like CI because of personal choices, personal beliefs, etc, I have no problem with that, and I will not call you anti-CI. You can talk about why you don't like CI, and if it's a false belief, or false fact, it most likely will be attacked.

Sometimes I think of this subject as pro-choice, Pro-life. Pro life have their reasons why they are against abortion, and they back up their facts (which are true). Pro-Choice back up their facts as well. This battle won't win. same thing for Pro-CI, Anti-CI - the battle won't win. However, if both sides realize that "this exists", we can learn from both sides. I did not realize how many people out there that the CI doesn't work for them until I looked through this site or heard from others, but then I discovered the reason WHY it didn't work for them.

The one issue that bothers me the most is that some people will say, "See! Implant didn't work for him because HIS PARENTS FORCED CI!" Having the CI does not "fail" because of the force from the parents. Yes, there's some users that do not want to use their CI because they blame their parents forcing them to have CI, but it doesn't mean that the CI doesn't work anymore....it was a personal choice for this person not to have CI. I hope I'm making some sense in this statement...
It doesn't make me any more Pro-CI, or less Anti-CI. I am against CI for several reasons, and I'm an advocate for CI for several reasons.

Does that help clarify things a little bit? Mind you, this is from MY observation.

Yes it does.
Thanaks,
Rick

 

[rick48]

I agree somewhat you say. However, I've read some posts that the facts aren't true, and they spread around that CI is no good. That pisses me off that they're spreading stuff that aren't even true.

They would say stuff like, CI should never be implanted on children, CI sucks, Poor to those people who were ex-CIers, etc...then they don't back up their facts. There are posts that says "Why implant kids? Accept their deafness? who cares HA doesn't help. Use ASL. Don't use oral methods. CI destroys Deaf culture, etc" among those lines. THOSE people I call anti-ci because they won't accept the fact that CI is helpful for SOME people. I've always said that CI is not for everyone, and it's all based on personal choices (majority about parents implanting their children)

I'm sorry for those people who did not do the research beforehand (like many parents who implanted their children and thinking that they will be hearing, or adults with high expectations, etc), or the implant didn't work for them for various reasons (lack of training, bad surgery, bad implant, or as simple as it just doesn't work for them).

It's okay if people don't like CI because of personal choices, personal beliefs, etc, I have no problem with that, and I will not call you anti-CI. You can talk about why you don't like CI, and if it's a false belief, or false fact, it most likely will be attacked.

Sometimes I think of this subject as pro-choice, Pro-life. Pro life have their reasons why they are against abortion, and they back up their facts (which are true). Pro-Choice back up their facts as well. This battle won't win. same thing for Pro-CI, Anti-CI - the battle won't win. However, if both sides realize that "this exists", we can learn from both sides. I did not realize how many people out there that the CI doesn't work for them until I looked through this site or heard from others, but then I discovered the reason WHY it didn't work for them.

The one issue that bothers me the most is that some people will say, "See! Implant didn't work for him because HIS PARENTS FORCED CI!" Having the CI does not "fail" because of the force from the parents. Yes, there's some users that do not want to use their CI because they blame their parents forcing them to have CI, but it doesn't mean that the CI doesn't work anymore....it was a personal choice for this person not to have CI. I hope I'm making some sense in this statement...
It doesn't make me any more Pro-CI, or less Anti-CI. I am against CI for several reasons, and I'm an advocate for CI for several reasons.

Does that help clarify things a little bit? Mind you, this is from MY observation.

Yes it does.
Thanks,
Rick

 

[jillio]

I agree somewhat you say. However, I've read some posts that the facts aren't true, and they spread around that CI is no good. That pisses me off that they're spreading stuff that aren't even true.

They would say stuff like, CI should never be implanted on children, CI sucks, Poor to those people who were ex-CIers, etc...then they don't back up their facts. There are posts that says "Why implant kids? Accept their deafness? who cares HA doesn't help. Use ASL. Don't use oral methods. CI destroys Deaf culture, etc" among those lines. THOSE people I call anti-ci because they won't accept the fact that CI is helpful for SOME people. I've always said that CI is not for everyone, and it's all based on personal choices (majority about parents implanting their children)

I'm sorry for those people who did not do the research beforehand (like many parents who implanted their children and thinking that they will be hearing, or adults with high expectations, etc), or the implant didn't work for them for various reasons (lack of training, bad surgery, bad implant, or as simple as it just doesn't work for them).

It's okay if people don't like CI because of personal choices, personal beliefs, etc, I have no problem with that, and I will not call you anti-CI. You can talk about why you don't like CI, and if it's a false belief, or false fact, it most likely will be attacked.

Sometimes I think of this subject as pro-choice, Pro-life. Pro life have their reasons why they are against abortion, and they back up their facts (which are true). Pro-Choice back up their facts as well. This battle won't win. same thing for Pro-CI, Anti-CI - the battle won't win. However, if both sides realize that "this exists", we can learn from both sides. I did not realize how many people out there that the CI doesn't work for them until I looked through this site or heard from others, but then I discovered the reason WHY it didn't work for them.

The one issue that bothers me the most is that some people will say, "See! Implant didn't work for him because HIS PARENTS FORCED CI!" Having the CI does not "fail" because of the force from the parents. Yes, there's some users that do not want to use their CI because they blame their parents forcing them to have CI, but it doesn't mean that the CI doesn't work anymore....it was a personal choice for this person not to have CI. I hope I'm making some sense in this statement...
It doesn't make me any more Pro-CI, or less Anti-CI. I am against CI for several reasons, and I'm an advocate for CI for several reasons.

Does that help clarify things a little bit? Mind you, this is from MY observation.

I couldn't agree with you more, Lady S. The problems seem to arise most often when some posters are incapable of separating disagreement with an educational philosophy from disagreement with implantation. I am quite often called "anti-CI" here based on nothing more than the fact that I am opposed to an oral only educational environment. The two are not one and the same.

 

[flip]

I agree somewhat you say. However, I've read some posts that the facts aren't true, and they spread around that CI is no good. That pisses me off that they're spreading stuff that aren't even true.

They would say stuff like, CI should never be implanted on children, CI sucks, Poor to those people who were ex-CIers, etc...then they don't back up their facts. There are posts that says "Why implant kids? Accept their deafness? who cares HA doesn't help. Use ASL. Don't use oral methods. CI destroys Deaf culture, etc" among those lines. THOSE people I call anti-ci because they won't accept the fact that CI is helpful for SOME people. I've always said that CI is not for everyone, and it's all based on personal choices (majority about parents implanting their children)

I'm sorry for those people who did not do the research beforehand (like many parents who implanted their children and thinking that they will be hearing, or adults with high expectations, etc), or the implant didn't work for them for various reasons (lack of training, bad surgery, bad implant, or as simple as it just doesn't work for them).

It's okay if people don't like CI because of personal choices, personal beliefs, etc, I have no problem with that, and I will not call you anti-CI. You can talk about why you don't like CI, and if it's a false belief, or false fact, it most likely will be attacked.

Sometimes I think of this subject as pro-choice, Pro-life. Pro life have their reasons why they are against abortion, and they back up their facts (which are true). Pro-Choice back up their facts as well. This battle won't win. same thing for Pro-CI, Anti-CI - the battle won't win. However, if both sides realize that "this exists", we can learn from both sides. I did not realize how many people out there that the CI doesn't work for them until I looked through this site or heard from others, but then I discovered the reason WHY it didn't work for them.

The one issue that bothers me the most is that some people will say, "See! Implant didn't work for him because HIS PARENTS FORCED CI!" Having the CI does not "fail" because of the force from the parents. Yes, there's some users that do not want to use their CI because they blame their parents forcing them to have CI, but it doesn't mean that the CI doesn't work anymore....it was a personal choice for this person not to have CI. I hope I'm making some sense in this statement...
It doesn't make me any more Pro-CI, or less Anti-CI. I am against CI for several reasons, and I'm an advocate for CI for several reasons.

Does that help clarify things a little bit? Mind you, this is from MY observation.

As you said, there is often a limited range of reasons to be against CI. I have decided to declare my self anti-CI because to me, CI is not a neutral piece of technology and it's negative impact on deaf people outweights the positive effects.

If our brain haven't evolved to something else the last century, and our need have been almost the same for thousands of years, one can ask where the habit of leaving deaf children in the forrest are today. I find that habit in surgery rooms in hospitals nationwide. It's actually more effective feed deaf people to wolves as you get rid of them completely, but it's more money in tricking parents to belive their children will become hearies or much more successful with CI alone(oralism).

I think organizations with HOH and deaf board members and the government should control the use if CI, so deaf people can enjoy this piece of technology if they want, avoiding it abused to fit the needs of primitive human traits. As long it does not happen, I am very against CI.

There is rules for abortation, but we have none for CI.

Good post by the way!

 

[LadySekhmet]

As you said, there is often a limited range of reasons to be against CI. I have decided to declare my self anti-CI because to me, CI is not a neutral piece of technology and it's negative impact on deaf people outweights the positive effects.

If our brain haven't evolved to something else the last century, and our need have been almost the same for thousands of years, one can ask where the habit of leaving deaf children in the forrest are today. I find that habit in surgery rooms in hospitals nationwide. It's actually more effective feed deaf people to wolves as you get rid of them completely, but it's more money in tricking parents to belive their children will become hearies or much more successful with CI alone(oralism).

I think organizations with HOH and deaf board members and the government should control the use if CI, so deaf people can enjoy this piece of technology if they want, avoiding it abused to fit the needs of primitive human traits. As long it does not happen, I am very against CI.

There is rules for abortation, but we have none for CI.

Good post by the way!

That's *Exactly* what I'm looking for by people who are against CI. I respect you a lot more because you backed your feelings up...and that's pretty good statement!

I agree that organizations with deaf board members and government should at least control CI implantations. I'm not saying that CI should not be used at all, but there should be some strict rules. Having said that, it would be tough because then those people who want to implant their child or themselves will say that the government is too controlling and there's no freedom of choice. This is speaking from US point of view. It's a no win situation. If there are some rules/guidelines, what's going to happen if the people that were already implanted break the rules?

What rules would you like to see implemented if you don't mind me asking.

 

[rick48]

That's *Exactly* what I'm looking for by people who are against CI. I respect you a lot more because you backed your feelings up...and that's pretty good statement!

I agree that organizations with deaf board members and government should at least control CI implantations. I'm not saying that CI should not be used at all, but there should be some strict rules. Having said that, it would be tough because then those people who want to implant their child or themselves will say that the government is too controlling and there's no freedom of choice. This is speaking from US point of view. It's a no win situation. If there are some rules/guidelines, what's going to happen if the people that were already implanted break the rules?

What rules would you like to see implemented if you don't mind me asking.

In the US there are rules and standards set first by the FDA concerning cochlear implamts and who is eligible and the criteria for determing eligibility but those are the minimum requirements. Each implant center can then set stricter requirements if they so determine. So exactly what rules are you talking about?
Rick

 

[shel90]

I couldn't agree with you more, Lady S. The problems seem to arise most often when some posters are incapable of separating disagreement with an educational philosophy from disagreement with implantation. I am quite often called "anti-CI" here based on nothing more than the fact that I am opposed to an oral only educational environment. The two are not one and the same.

That goes the same for me. If anyone wants to call me anti-anything, call me anti-oral ONLY and I will not be offended cuz those are my true honest feelings about that kind of education approach. Children with CIs can get both ASL and oral...I dont understand why it must be either one. Doesnt make sense.

 

[LadySekhmet]

In the US there are rules and standards set first by the FDA concerning cochlear implamts and who is eligible and the criteria for determing eligibility but those are the minimum requirements. Each implant center can then set stricter requirements if they so determine. So exactly what rules are you talking about?
Rick

You said:

There is rules for abortation, but we have none for CI.

So there, what rules do you want to see implemented for the CI because you said we have "none."

 

[Drew's Dad]

You said:



So there, what rules do you want to see implemented for the CI because you said we have "none."

That's a good point because on blogs and some threads here you will see people describing the difficulty they have faced in getting an implant for themselves or their children because they don't meet some type of standard.

 

[vallee]

That's a good point because on blogs and some threads here you will see people describing the difficulty they have faced in getting an implant for themselves or their children because they don't meet some type of standard.

It is a good point, I agree.

What I found out is just because I met the FDA(government) requirements for implants, does not mean you meet your insurance requirements for implants. My insurance did not want to cover bilateral implants, that was my problem.

 

[rick48]

You said:



So there, what rules do you want to see implemented for the CI because you said we have "none."

Actually, that second quote was not mine but flip's. I am fine with the guidelines set forth by the FDA and if an implant center wants to impose stricter guidelines then that is their perrogative.

I am not certain what is meant by saying that there are no rules governing the cochlear implant process.
Rick

 

[LadySekhmet]

Actually, that second quote was not mine but flip's. I am fine with the guidelines set forth by the FDA and if an implant center wants to impose stricter guidelines then that is their perrogative.

I am not certain what is meant by saying that there are no rules governing the cochlear implant process.
Rick

My apologies. :Oops: I meant it to made it to a response to Flip's comment. He says he want to have rules, and I'm asking him what rules does he want implemented. So, I apologize that I got it mixed up.

I agree with what you say about audiologists/implant centers should have more stricter guidelines. However, there may be issues for those who really really want it regardless of the strict guidelines, then they'll go out of the way to make sure that their child get one/ or get one themselves.

 

[jillio]

My apologies. :Oops: I meant it to made it to a response to Flip's comment. He says he want to have rules, and I'm asking him what rules does he want implemented. So, I apologize that I got it mixed up.

I agree with what you say about audiologists/implant centers should have more stricter guidelines. However, there may be issues for those who really really want it regardless of the strict guidelines, then they'll go out of the way to make sure that their child get one/ or get one themselves.

Srticter guidelines need to start with dessimination of inforamtion and liasons from the deaf comumity working with parents of newly diagnosed children. Parents need to be informed of long term, holistic implications of CI, not just immediate medical implications.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

That's risky considering the accuracy rate of hearing tests on infants. But they will never know because they already destroyed the residual hearing by then. There are cases of where children were mistaken for being deaf till they were a year old only to discover that that's not the case. They should wait at least a year.

*nodding agreement*

 

[GalaxyAngel]

The audiologist is stupid to say things.

Unbelievable I read whole these pages from 1 to end..

My gosh.. :sure:

Yeah Banjo, that what my second thought where is their child speak it out ???

Isn't worth this debate here..

Whoever The parents always think RIGHT everything push Deaf Community away. where you get your FRIGG'N OWN CI-FORUMS.. why here? CI-FORUMS should have peace your mind and discussing your food of thoughts feedback instead here!

(sigh)
I wish Admin should have not create CI thread here...
Get their own frigg'n CI forum.. get their pocket pull out of $ buy domain!
Let Parent can feel comfortable and discussing.. I've seen you everyone kept constantly bashing to Deaf community, and directly putting Deaf people's mouth shut up!
I'm not allow you like that way!

(blabbering angrily)

 

[jillio]

The audiologist is stupid to say things.

Unbelievable I read whole these pages from 1 to end..

My gosh.. :sure:

Yeah Banjo, that what my second thought where is their child speak it out ???

Isn't worth this debate here..

Whoever The parents always think RIGHT everything push Deaf Community away. where you get your FRIGG'N OWN CI-FORUMS.. why here? CI-FORUMS should have peace your mind and discussing your food of thoughts feedback instead here!

(sigh)
I wish Admin should have not create CI thread here...
Get their own frigg'n CI forum.. get their pocket pull out of $ buy domain!
Let Parent can feel comfortable and discussing.. I've seen you everyone kept constantly bashing to Deaf community, and directly putting Deaf people's mouth shut up!
I'm not allow you like that way!

(blabbering angrily)

They do have their own CI forums, GA. But they aren't satisfied with that. They still seem to feel the need to convince everyone that CI implantation for children is a panacea to problems with the deaf.

 

[shel90]

The audiologist is stupid to say things.

Unbelievable I read whole these pages from 1 to end..

My gosh.. :sure:

Yeah Banjo, that what my second thought where is their child speak it out ???

Isn't worth this debate here..

Whoever The parents always think RIGHT everything push Deaf Community away. where you get your FRIGG'N OWN CI-FORUMS.. why here? CI-FORUMS should have peace your mind and discussing your food of thoughts feedback instead here!

(sigh)
I wish Admin should have not create CI thread here...
Get their own frigg'n CI forum.. get their pocket pull out of $ buy domain!
Let Parent can feel comfortable and discussing.. I've seen you everyone kept constantly bashing to Deaf community, and directly putting Deaf people's mouth shut up!
I'm not allow you like that way!

(blabbering angrily)

yea, when we try to share our experiences and opinions, we are labeled as anti-CI, close-minded, or ridiculous. *sighs*

 

[TechBill]

I would never tell anyone either hearing or deaf to go and that they are not welcome here.

It just not right ....

If you don't like what they post just don't reply or quote them unless your looking for something or to stir something up just like them.

.

 

[LadySekhmet]

The audiologist is stupid to say things.

Unbelievable I read whole these pages from 1 to end..

My gosh.. :sure:

Yeah Banjo, that what my second thought where is their child speak it out ???

Isn't worth this debate here..

Whoever The parents always think RIGHT everything push Deaf Community away. where you get your FRIGG'N OWN CI-FORUMS.. why here? CI-FORUMS should have peace your mind and discussing your food of thoughts feedback instead here!

(sigh)
I wish Admin should have not create CI thread here...
Get their own frigg'n CI forum.. get their pocket pull out of $ buy domain!
Let Parent can feel comfortable and discussing.. I've seen you everyone kept constantly bashing to Deaf community, and directly putting Deaf people's mouth shut up!
I'm not allow you like that way!

(blabbering angrily)

Then why are you reading the Hearing Aids/CI threads? Don't even bother trying to read it if you feel that it's getting your feathers riled up. You are entitled to your own opinion, but don't get mad at US for having an opinion.

All I can tell you is this, don't even bother reading these threads. But hey, it's freedom of speech.