Success for deaf community

Mrs Bucket said:
It was actually to both you and rockdrummer, I forgot to quote him as well. My apologies for the confusion.

I appreciate the fact you are honest & prefer the fact you approach things logically as it should be. I don't see you as cold-hearted because I see you as a sensible person.

Naturally people are upset if a law is passed and I'm not going to mince words here, this is future Deaf children's lives being determined by the lawmakers who have very little or no vested interest in Deaf Culture & the Deaf Community.

Why are you disturbed by the weird twist of this topic when we, the Deaf ADers, go through this on a daily basis?
Click to expand...

Thanks, Mrs Bucket. You're really cool. :)

I am disturbed because it was about a state being the first to require for insurance companies to pay for the CI and somehow it converted into the Great CI Implementation, forcing every deaf person get the CI. Am I the only one who sees it as a step forward? Although it is a misguided step forward because I know they think it's a miracle. However, I prefer dealing with people asking me "Why can't you talk on the phone yet?" rather than not being able to get the CI at all. But that's just me.

I think David Cullen's comment was very insensitive and THAT'S what I'm pissed off about. I have the CI, but I "amazingly" went through 26 years without a CI..... Ironicially, I got a good job that has good insurance so I would be able to pay for the CI....... Gee, how can a deafie do that?
 
I think the big problem here is not so much that adult will ever be 'forced' to have CI. I don't think it will come to the point where there will be a law stating that all deaf persons must undergo CI surgery or else...but I do think we are flirting dangerously with having CIs forced on yet unborn and very young deaf children. With this thing in WI, parents will be more and more looked down upon if they don't immediately send their baby into surgery. It may even get to the point where, once a child is deemed operable and has shown the needed hearing loss, the CI will be become complusory...like the chemotherapy is for that thirteen-year-old...except, instead of saving their lives, we are "simply" changing their lives in a profound way to be more on cue with the hearing world. Should that be a complusion, that is the question. Is it wrong for the law to make it something parents have to do for their children, rather then something they choose to do? In the hearing culture, where the realities of CI is not clearly understood, most who have not been truly invovled with the deaf culture already deem it selfish and wrong for parents of deaf children to not run out and place them under the surgical knife. This is, above all, a serious lack of communication and understanding between the hearing and the deaf. Combined with a desire to 'do the right thing' dispite the fact that the right thing done for the wrong reason rarely comes out well, this whole situation is a powder keg and has been for years, as far as I can make out. Hearing people simply do not understand why those lacking in the hearing deparment could want anything other then to be "made whole", as they see it. They do not understand that CI is not always the answer, because the hearing world has been made to believe it is the magic cureall. I do not think that most hearing people mean to be inconsiderate on this issue...I think they are simply ignorant as to the realities of it.
 
Mrs Bucket said:
Unfortunately some people do not share your positive approach to CIs. As you mention some people like to go to the extremes and you cannot blame them. They reject change because they did not have positive change growing up so naturally some view "CI installation" as "cultural genocide."
Click to expand...
I empathize with deaf folks in this situation but there has to be a line between the truth and mis-information. It's the mis-information that spreads and causes people to get the wrong ideas. Yes there is the left, right and middle ground when it comes D/deaf culture and CI's. The reality is that cultural genocide of the D/deaf can never happen. If people understood the issues and facts they would know this. Did the D/deaf culture believe the same about cultural genocide when hearing aids came out? The facts are that not everyone will want a CI. Not everyone is a candidate for a CI and the CI will not work for everyone that chooses to get one.

Mrs Bucket said:
This is where, you rockdrummer, need to understand the history of eugenics and show some compassion and be careful with the line of questioning here if you may.
Click to expand...
I do understand eugenics. I personally don't agree with it (eugenics) but I don't believe that in the US there is nobody being sterilized or being prevented from conceiving or having forced abortions because it's determined there is a problem. At least not against their will. Maybe there are some rich hoitoi doties that want their offspring to be perfection and they are paying and doing such a thing but I don't believe anyone is being forced against their will.

I don't see anything wrong with my line of questioning. Somebody made an outrageous claim and all I asked them to do was back it up. I take offense to such claims without backing them up with facts. It insults my intelligence. Everybody is entitled to their opinions. I have no problem with that. It is perfectly reasonable to request facts to back up such a claim.

Mrs Bucket said:
As a hearing person, I admire you for your curiosity and your zest for learning however that zest can come across as offensive to some Deaf people. For others as jillio, she is "D"eaf because she is given that by us, the community.

Yes, you may say it's clique-y, but to us, it's a representation of who we are and our culture.

CIs, for some Deaf people, is another form of Eugenics. Some don't want CIs, some readily embrace it.

I applaud those who want CIs as I am an advocate of disability rights and I encourage those who want CIs to go for it, those who are ASL purists to educate CI users about ASL within reason and I encourage all to keep an open mind and an open heart.
Click to expand...
Maybe you don't give me enough credit bucket. I can now say I have a profound understanding and respect for the deaf experience and that is thanks in large part to this site and conversations such as this that I have had over the past several years. I am in no way saying I understand what it is like to be deaf and for many that experience is different due to advancements and our understanding of deafness. I believe that a deaf person growing up 30 years ago will have had a different experience that deaf people growing up today. It is also because I am living with the experiences that my deaf son has and seeing some of the issues first hand. It's because I am greatly interested and concerned about the education and personal well being of my deaf child. I fully understand there is a left right and middle to the D/deaf culture. I also understand there are deaf people that don't consider themselves part of the culture nor do they care to be. All of this is ok. I am Switzerland. I am neutral. I support choice. Just as there should be nobody telling the D/deaf what to do the other side of that coin is allowing folks to make choices as they see fit.

The last thing I mean to do is offend anybody. I am the type of person that wears my heart on my sleeve and I do understand that sometimes that doesn't translate well. So I do apologize if I have offended anybody. It is not my intention. I have a great respect for every human being regardless race, religion, social status or anything for that matter. But please understand I will challenge any claims such as this. I believe there should be accountability and balance especially with regard to these topics.

That said, I also feel like I am the bad guy here when I came in to this thread with support. Then a claim was made and all I did was challenge the claim. I don't think there is anything unreasonable about that.

Peace!
 
Daredevel7 said:
Thanks, Mrs Bucket. You're really cool. :)

I am disturbed because it was about a state being the first to require for insurance companies to pay for the CI and somehow it converted into the Great CI Implementation, forcing every deaf person get the CI. Am I the only one who sees it as a step forward? Although it is a misguided step forward because I know they think it's a miracle. However, I prefer dealing with people asking me "Why can't you talk on the phone yet?" rather than not being able to get the CI at all. But that's just me.

I think David Cullen's comment was very insensitive and THAT'S what I'm pissed off about. I have the CI, but I "amazingly" went through 26 years without a CI..... Ironicially, I got a good job that has good insurance so I would be able to pay for the CI....... Gee, how can a deafie do that?
Click to expand...
I agree with you. I came in with support but now feel like I am the bad guy because I challenged a claim that I feel is outrageous. People are missing the point about the insurance companies now having to cover the expense where before they would not. I have said it several times in this thread. This is a good thing for those that want to make the choice to get a CI.

Yes Cullen made some insensitive and ignorant comments. How many of you used the information I provided to contact him and let him know the errors of his position? Education and awareness. I am hopeful he is a reasonable man and may just need to understand some of the issues. You can't complain about something and then sit on your hands and do nothing about it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hearing people simply do not understand why those lacking in the hearing deparment could want anything other then to be "made whole", as they see it. They do not understand that CI is not always the answer, because the hearing world has been made to believe it is the magic cureall. I do not think that most hearing people mean to be inconsiderate on this issue...I think they are simply ignorant as to the realities of it.
Click to expand...
Good Points November Gypsy :)
Without knowing it or hearing much about AGB before you already know what the truth is!!

It's the mis-information that spreads and causes people to get the wrong ideas.
Click to expand...
I agree with this statement rockdrummer
The reality is that cultural genocide of the D/deaf can never happen.
Click to expand...
I disagree with this statement. It can only 'never happen' if there are those who stand up and refuse to allow it to happen. I count myself among those proud many.

I do understand eugenics. I personally don't agree with it (eugenics) but I don't believe that in the US there is nobody being sterilized or being prevented from conceiving or having forced abortions because it's determined there is a problem. At least not against their will. Maybe there are some rich hoitoi doties that want their offspring to be perfection and they are paying and doing such a thing but I don't believe anyone is being forced against their will.
Click to expand...
If a culture forgets their past and past struggles they are doomed to repeat them.
Eugenics was 'the norm' in the US and other countries.
The only reason it is covert now and isn't overt now is because people fought back and spoke out.
I see no correlation or conflict regarding how wealthy a person is or who wants a healthy baby and this topic. Did I miss something along the way about rich hoiti toities?

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockdrummer
There is a huge difference between being pressured and being forced.

Quote: jillio
Its a subjective difference.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. What one person may feel is a mere suggestion another person may feel is an obligation and another may feel is a requirement.
 
ASLGAL said:
Absolutely. What one person may feel is a mere suggestion another person may feel is an obligation and another may feel is a requirement.
Click to expand...

I agree. Whilst some people can resist pressure, some can't. Having experienced presure myself, I know what I am talking about.
 
rockdrummer said:
There is a huge difference between being pressured and being forced.
Click to expand...

You tell me if Jamie is being pressured or forced in this link: Cochlear Implants - My Cochlear Implant Story and her insurance would pay for CI but not for hearing aid. I don't know what kind of hearing aid loaner she got but if it is digital, it is worse than analog. I have tried digital when the audiologist tried to push it on me and I hate what I was hearing with digital. Everything is so dull and the voices sound more like mumbles. I don't like the fact that many insurances would pay for CI not HA. Their take is that CI is different from hearing aid. I think CI is the same as hearing aid because they both aid one to hear. Wisc is wise to force insurances to pay for both CI and HA but the belief that CI is better is there. I really hate the fact that the insurance companies would pay for CI but not for HA becuase that is tantamount to forcing one to take CI because many deaf people tend to have low paying jobs. Another thing about insurance that I don't like.... what if companies refuse to hire a deaf person just because if that deaf person undergo the CI surgery and the health insurance would be raised.
 
Buffalo said:
Under 18? What happened when their HA or CI broke and they got a low paying job???
Click to expand...

They are screwed just like an adult who needs a root canal but can't afford it due to low paying job (no insurance).
 
I don't like the idea of it being for under 18? Many deaf and deafblind people who benifit from CI and HA are over 18.
 
Daredevel7 said:
They are screwed just like an adult who needs a root canal but can't afford it due to low paying job (no insurance).
Click to expand...

And some companies when you do get hired that you have to wait up to 6 months before you are eligible for insurance, and in some cases you have to wait an entire year.

In these instances where the parents have no immediate access to insurance and cannot afford it on their own due to low income then I think Medicaid and Medicare should cover up to a certain amount and then the rest of it would need to be financed out into monthly installments until the bill is paid.

That's the only way around a lack of insurance that I can come up with that would help those that genuinely need the help and not just trying to ride the system simply because they don't want to work or refuse to pay their own bills.
 
Buffalo said:
Yeah so why some people are cheering for that bill???
Click to expand...

So you prefer to go for a bill that would require insurance to pay for assistive devices requested by ALL deaf people?

That would be nice..... but realistically that's just insanely expensive. At least the children are not being screwed over.
 
Daredevel7 said:
So you prefer to go for a bill that would require insurance to pay for assistive devices requested by ALL deaf people?

That would be nice..... but realistically that's just insanely expensive. At least the children are not being screwed over.
Click to expand...

That would be nice so the deaf people won't feel being force to take CI when they really want HA like Jamie Berke had. Many insurances would pay for CI but not hearing aid. I think CI and HA are both hearing aid since they aid one with hearing.
 
Mrs Bucket said:
Unfortunately some people do not share your positive approach to CIs. As you mention some people like to go to the extremes and you cannot blame them. They reject change because they did not have positive change growing up so naturally some view "CI installation" as "cultural genocide."

This is where, you rockdrummer, need to understand the history of eugenics and show some compassion and be careful with the line of questioning here if you may.

As a hearing person, I admire you for your curiosity and your zest for learning however that zest can come across as offensive to some Deaf people. For others as jillio, she is "D"eaf because she is given that by us, the community.

Yes, you may say it's clique-y, but to us, it's a representation of who we are and our culture.

CIs, for some Deaf people, is another form of Eugenics. Some don't want CIs, some readily embrace it.

I applaud those who want CIs as I am an advocate of disability rights and I encourage those who want CIs to go for it, those who are ASL purists to educate CI users about ASL within reason and I encourage all to keep an open mind and an open heart.
Click to expand...
Excellent post!
 
Buffalo said:
That would be nice so the deaf people won't feel being force to take CI when they really want HA like Jamie Berke had. Many insurances would pay for CI but not hearing aid. I think CI and HA are both hearing aid since they aid one with hearing.
Click to expand...

If the CI cost the same as a HA, I bet you that insurance would not cover it. People are under the assumption that insurance pays for EVERYTHING for a CI. My insurance paid for most of my CI surgery, but I still had to shell out 3 grand, which is about the same as a hearing aid.....

I mean realistically what do you expect? If insurance covers 90% of CI, so by prinicipal they must cover 90% of a HA too? The purpose of insurance is to make everything reasonably accessible, not to make everything cheap. HAs that aren't covered are still reasonably accessible (you can even do monthly payments). CIs are not. Insurance does not have magic unlimited resources and must balance between the insanely expensive surgeries and the cheaper devices.
 
Buffalo said:
Y....................... I don't know what kind of hearing aid loaner she got but if it is digital, it is worse than analog. I have tried digital when the audiologist tried to push it on me and I hate what I was hearing with digital. Everything is so dull and the voices sound more like mumbles. I don't like the fact that many insurances would pay for CI not HA. Their take is that CI is different from hearing aid. I think CI is the same as hearing aid because they both aid one to hear. Wisc is wise to force insurances to pay for both CI and HA but the belief that CI is better is there. I really hate the fact that the insurance companies would pay for CI but not for HA becuase that is tantamount to forcing one to take CI because many deaf people tend to have low paying jobs. Another thing about insurance that I don't like.... what if companies refuse to hire a deaf person just because if that deaf person undergo the CI surgery and the health insurance would be raised.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry Buffalo, while I respect your opinions I simply don't share your views on this. Trust me when I tell you that Insurance companies will ALWAYS take the least expensive route. A CI is NOT the least expensive route. It is why in my opinion there needs to be a law that will make them pay for it for those that choose to go down that route.
 
Back
Top