I totally understand what you are saying and what you did to help resolve it is exactly what I was saying to Shel. Not everybody cares to get in the face of others but sometimes that is what you have to do to get a point across. I find myself having to do that with hearing people. I am by no means trying to compare the two and I know that deaf people experience this daily whereas I maybe encounter these situations only once and a while.
It seems to me Shel did try to though. The thing is, after several years of the patterns not changing, you have to realize it probably is not going to change, ever. All too often when they are finally confronted about it in a serious way, the deaf person is told they are being rude, getting mad over nothing, given a sob story(but they don't change anything afterwards), it gets easy to just give up, the stresses of trying to get your point across is very stressful in itself. Why do we even need to explain it in the first place? It's not like parents are total strangers..
I am not pro or anti CI. In fact if you know my story I only have experience with CI failure. I still cant help thinking that if a CI worked for someone like you or Shel, that it would resolve the issues that you speak of here. What are your thoughts on that?
But see, that's the mentality of making the deaf person 'accommodate to his/her family'. Instead of slapping the parents silly for not making *themselves* accessible to the child, the deaf person must be 'changed'. Why not make the parents BE parents? Shel's example in the OP of parents not willing to accommodate themselves for the child is all too common. Upon the CI not working for that child, why didn't the parents learn sign language? Why continue to place the "responsiblity" on the child?
Anyways.. when I first learned of CIs, the cynic in me did think "Well, that should make it easier for the deaf kids to talk with their parents, 'cuz hell knows many parents won't make any effort on their part...."
However I fell into the trap where I assumed CIs were similar to normal hearing ability. As in slap 'em on and toss them out and they'll be hearin' n' talkin, no problemo.. Still don't know much about how well they work, seems they are not all that really & the person needs training to learn how to use it. I recently read a comment that even late deafened persons with CI need training on how to use their CIs, if true then I find that very interesting..
So that makes me think that a young kid with CI & no sign language exposure basically start out being "trained" to hear and speak.. which seems to be delaying language exposure. I'm uncomfortable with that, especially considering the potential of CI not working all that well for individuals. Must they pay for lack of early language exposure & general education, just for the sake of being able to hear and speak well? I disagree with that concept..
So.. I can't say my being implanted with CI would have made my life easier. Sure, ordering at a fast food place would be a lot easier but from the looks of it, I still would have the same problems & "battles" with family over communication issues.. Jr & high school might have been worse, if I had reasonable speaking and hearing skill for them to decide I could go at it solo at a mainstream school. I don't know. (I knew a girl who was the only deaf person throughout her schooling.. even though she could hear and speak very well- she could even use the phone.. but the horror stories she told me.. she's a full on ASL user now..)
Overall, I'm not anti CI, it's more the attitudes surrounding it that makes me sad.
p.s. I don't know of your story with CI failure btw..
