We Need Current Info Before Writing Off Cochlear Implants

rick48 said:
Meant to add that I do not think parents view it as a crutch but rather they view oral language as more important and useful in the long run.
Rick
Click to expand...

Becasue they are hearing and view deafness from a hearing perspective.
 
shel90 said:
Iam deaf so I view deafness from a deaf perspective. :)
Click to expand...

And even though I am a hearie, I try very hard to view things from a Deaf perspective. I owe that to my son, and to the Deaf Community that he is a part of.
 
Drew's Dad said:
Not knowing a word, or not knowing how to say a word does not mean that "oral communication fails her".

Similarly, just because I don't know 99% of ASL does not mean that communication through sign "fails" me. It only means that I don't know ASL.
Click to expand...


jillio said:
Which is exactly why [the above] analogy is not useful in dertemining that which needs empirical evidence.
Click to expand...

There is nothing in my post that attempts to "determine" anything, and no piece of my analogy needs empirical evidence.

If the ASL analogy upsets you, simply replace it with uncertainty on how to communicate a word by using morse code through a series of eye blinks, written language, or telepathy. Simply because someone does not have the skill to utilize a certain word (or sign) does not mean that that language has "failed them" as you originally asserted.

Determining "failure" in utilizing a certain language is what demands empirical evidence, of which you provided none in coming to the conclusion that Cloggy's daughter was "failed" by oral language.

I suspect you are simply arguing for argument's sake.
 
Drew's Dad said:
There is nothing in my post that attempts to "determine" anything, and no piece of my analogy needs empirical evidence.

If the ASL analogy upsets you, simply replace it with uncertainty on how to communicate a word by using morse code through a series of eye blinks, written language, or telepathy. Simply because someone does not have the skill to utilize a certain word (or sign) does not mean that that language has "failed them" as you originally asserted.

Determining "failure" in utilizing a certain language is what demands empirical evidence, of which you provided none in coming to the conclusion that Cloggy's daughter was "failed" by oral language.

I suspect you are simply arguing for argument's sake.
Click to expand...

You suspect incorrectly. And if one needs to communicate a concept, idea, or need, and the language they are using doesn't allow for that, the language has indeed failed to complete the task for which it was intended--communication. Further indication of the failure would be the action of using another language to ensure communication of the intended message.

And by simply participating in this discussion, you are most certainly attempting to determine something--the validity of manual communication for the implanted child.
 
switching between 2 different languages is hard enough for an adult to do....

languages convey meaning very differently......im hearing and a native english speaker, and there has been times i couldn't think of an english word to fit what i was trying to say and a sign did it for me. Or times i would be signing a conversation, and would do a sign, then a hearing person ask me what that sign meant and i wasn't able to tell them right away without thinking about it for a bit. Does this mean english failed me? hardly
 
Ariakkas said:
switching between 2 different languages is hard enough for an adult to do....

languages convey meaning very differently......im hearing and a native english speaker, and there has been times i couldn't think of an english word to fit what i was trying to say and a sign did it for me. Or times i would be signing a conversation, and would do a sign, then a hearing person ask me what that sign meant and i wasn't able to tell them right away without thinking about it for a bit. Does this mean english failed me? hardly
Click to expand...

Languages convey meaning through symbol and that is what varies. Concept remains consistent. And what your difficulties mean is that you were having great difficulty switching from that which is expressed visual/spatially and that which is expressed auditorily/orally. Your problems are based on fluency. The isssues with a deaf individual are completely different that the issues of a hearing individual. Please don't equate the two.
 
jillio said:
Languages convey meaning through symbol and that is what varies. Concept remains consistent. And what your difficulties mean is that you were having great difficulty switching from that which is expressed visual/spatially and that which is expressed auditorily/orally. Your problems are based on fluency. The isssues with a deaf individual are completely different that the issues of a hearing individual. Please don't equate the two.
Click to expand...

People..u can't compare deaf children to hearing children let alone comparing them to hearing adults who already have total proficenty in language or languages. I see many of u comparing deaf children to yourselves as adults. Hell, I can't even, as a deaf adult who is bilingual compare myself to hearing people who are bilingual. I get full access to 1 language which is ASL and partial access to English. That puts me at an disadvantage if I am compared to hearing people so for deaf children who DO NOT even have a strong L1 language is even worse!!! That is the difference.
If u want to compare, use deaf children from deaf families as Jillo stated before.
 
jillio said:
Languages convey meaning through symbol and that is what varies. Concept remains consistent. And what your difficulties mean is that you were having great difficulty switching from that which is expressed visual/spatially and that which is expressed auditorily/orally. Your problems are based on fluency. The isssues with a deaf individual are completely different that the issues of a hearing individual. Please don't equate the two.
Click to expand...

You act as if you were there with Cloggy's daughter and have the ability and skill to determine that her daughter's "issue" was not based on fluency. That's an amazing skill.

Or is it simply that since "[t]he issues with a deaf individual are completely different tha[n] the issues of a hearing individual", you know that any deaf child's difficulty in what some would call fluency are due to a failure of the auditory language.

Which one is it?
 
shel90 said:
People..u can't compare deaf children to hearing children let alone comparing them to hearing adults who already have total proficenty in language or languages. I see many of u comparing deaf children to yourselves as adults. Hell, I can't even, as a deaf adult who is bilingual compare myself to hearing people who are bilingual. I get full access to 1 language which is ASL and partial access to English. That puts me at an disadvantage if I am compared to hearing people so for deaf children who DO NOT even have a strong L1 language is even worse!!! That is the difference.
If u want to compare, use deaf children from deaf families as Jillo stated before.
Click to expand...


Shel.. this is one point I hate to disagree with you on, but I must. In my personal case, you absolutely can compare a deaf child to a hearing child. You see, my deaf son has a hearing twin brother (fraternal)... My deaf son was implanted at 11 months.. .and then got his second implant at the age of 5. He is growing up in the same exact enviroment as my hearing son... same parents.. same family..... Here's the kicker......... when it comes to language (comphrension and acquisition) my DEAF son is 2 LEVELS above my hearing son... My deaf son is reading above grade level (where my hearing son is at grade level)... My deaf son is at the top of his class, my hearing son is at grade level....In my personal experience, implanting a child earlier and with a great support system, I think that the risk of failure is low... Just my personal opinion... And with that said.. I have 5 nephews and a niece who are implanted..... all at various ages.... not one failure at all...... Just my 2 cents!
 
doubletrouble said:
Shel.. this is one point I hate to disagree with you on, but I must. In my personal case, you absolutely can compare a deaf child to a hearing child. You see, my deaf son has a hearing twin brother (fraternal)... My deaf son was implanted at 11 months.. .and then got his second implant at the age of 5. He is growing up in the same exact enviroment as my hearing son... same parents.. same family..... Here's the kicker......... when it comes to language (comphrension and acquisition) my DEAF son is 2 LEVELS above my hearing son... My deaf son is reading above grade level (where my hearing son is at grade level)... My deaf son is at the top of his class, my hearing son is at grade level....In my personal experience, implanting a child earlier and with a great support system, I think that the risk of failure is low... Just my personal opinion... And with that said.. I have 5 nephews and a niece who are implanted..... all at various ages.... not one failure at all...... Just my 2 cents!
Click to expand...
Great for your son!
Iam speaking in terms of full access to language..when your deaf son takes his CI off, can he comunicate with other hearing people or still pick up language without it? That's the thing that makes the difference. With a CI, he is hearing, apparently but without it, he is deaf so that means to compare hearing and deaf, he has to wear it all the time?

Iam not trying to bash u or anything but that's just how I see it. Can those deaf kids still communicate without their CIs or r they 100% dependent on them? Iam sure all of u see it differently. I just see it the other way.

I just met a guy who is deaf but doesn't know sign language at the store today. It was interesting to talk to a deaf person without signing but he was asking me about CIs and he was afraid. He said he wants to hear and I told him that yep, it will make him hearing. I figured if he wanted to hear so badly he will be successful with it. I am not gonna be negative about CIs. Iam not stupid...I just wish signing wasn't dropped like a "hot potato". :ugh: I asked the guy about ever wanting to learn siogn language and he said why bother cuz he will become hearing with a CI. I had to refrain myself cuz he was having trouble understanding his own hearing wife. Funny, I cud understand her better than him. I just thought it was a surreal experience today.

So if we can compare deaf kids with CIs to hearing children then they r essentially hearing people as well? That's the only way I can see a justification in comparing deaf children to hearing people.
 
jillo, thanks.....exactly. And rick48, that attitude is VERY VERY common. Look at the language used to promote oral programs......they really really push the fact that oral programming is not "speshal"....It's not explictly said, but it's implied very strongly!
Are you saying that kids continue on with their s&l therapy even after they become adults? If so, then one of us is way-off because only one kid I know continued it after HS, and that was just for a few sessions in the summer, but then she was an oral deaf kid going to Harvard so who am I to question!
Click to expand...
Huh? Where'd you get that? What I was asking is what percentage of oral dhh kids ever graduate (meaning speak so well they no longer require speech/language services in their IEP) from speech therapy. I doubt there's ANYONE(or very few people) who continue speech therapy, after graduation from high school (b/c it's VERY VERY boring, and very expensive!)

Aren't you contradicting yourself? If kids with cis do well, then what is wrong with them having a ci? Also, I do not know what research you are referring to because in most of what I have read over the years, the biggest variable in terms of how a person performs with a ci is the time frame between onset of deafness and implantation.
Click to expand...
No, I'm not. I am saying that dhh kids' performance in varirious and sundry areas, is generally due to a whole bunch of factors, not just one. Yes, there are some kids who do really well, but I mean even back in the old days, there were kids who could hear pretty well with primative hearing aids. I've never said that having a CI is wrong (except in the cases where some people view them as the latest greatest gotta have trendy hearing aid)
And the research on CIs, has indicated that there's no one real factor for sucess......performance varies significently (just as with hearing aids!)



I actually think that being bilingual in sign and any spoken language is more valuable than having two spoken languages. There is a greater likelihood of me being able to communicate english with a spaniard verbally as opposed to communicating orally with a totally deaf person who only signs.

I think signing is becoming viewed as "cool" much more than in the past. The baby signing classes that have sprouted up are probably part of the reason.

On the other hand, you know why many hearing people view sign language as a disability crutch. It's because the majority of people don't use sign, at least a good many of hearing people view being deaf as a disability at least to some degree, and many would compare the use of sign to "speak" to the amputee using a wheelchair to "walk", or the blind person using a dog to "see", both of which have been labeled "disabled persons". That's just the way many people see it at this time, right or wrong.

By the way, I don't want anyone feeling sorry for my son because he's deaf, and I certainly am not going to promote the idea that he is "disabled". While many would consider deafness a disability, out of all the "disabilities" one could work through in thier life, being deaf would be the one you'd want (for me at least). You're just like any other person, without the ability to hear (to varying degrees). Physically, mentally, emotionally, and spiritually you are like any other person - and there's a lot to be thankful for right there, and an open road in front of you.
Click to expand...
AWESOME VIEW DrewsDad! VERY healthy view!
With a CI, he is hearing, apparently
Click to expand...
Nope, correction he's hoh. There's a HUGE difference between being hearing and hoh.
 
jillio said:
Because when sign interpretation is provided under the public hearing schools system it is listed as such, and when employers, higher education, or government agencies are required to prvide interpretation it is listed as such. Anything that is a slight deviation of the norm is considered as such.
And,no I am not dd, but I do understand exactly where she is coming from.
Click to expand...


While that sounds nice and probably answers some other question, it has nothing to do with the question I asked DD
 
jillio said:
rick48 said:
That's jsut the problem. You know only one kid..... DD has never said, nor have any of the other posters you missread, said that having a CI is "wrong". And the same thing can be said about language acquisition in a child who does not have a CI. Age of onset is always bears a direct correlation on the development of oral skills.
Click to expand...





There is no "problem" other then the one you are attempting to manufacture.

BTW the issue was not age of onset but the time frame between onset of deafness and implantation. Two totally different issues.
Click to expand...
 
jillio said:
Becasue they are hearing and view deafness from a hearing perspective.
Click to expand...

That's a nice trite little saying regurgitated time and time again.
However, as I know deaf parents who are raising deaf children and are giving them oral s&L therapy, guess your trite little saying has been shot down.

Have you ever considered the possibility that since virtually everyone in say, the United States where I live, communicates orally in English that parents have determined there are certain advantages to being able to effectively communicate orally in English? That it is a "perspective" rooted in common sense? That is also why they do not raise their hearing children to use French as their primary language. Also that acquiring oral skills does not have to be at the expense of also acquiring manual communication skills and that the preference of one method over another does not equate to demeaning the non-preferred choice? That every child has unique needs and strengths and that most parents strive to meet those needs and strengths? Try looking at it from that "perspective" and it might provide you with some insight into others who chose a different path to raising their child.
 
Last edited:
deafdyke said:
And rick48, that attitude is VERY VERY common. Look at the language used to promote oral programs......they really really push the fact that oral programming is not "speshal"....It's not explictly said, but it's implied very strongly! "


I must have missed that. Can you please give me a specific example of the language used to promote oral programs? I have never seen anyone use the term "speshal" so can you give me a specific example of the use of that term as well?

"Huh? Where'd you get that? What I was asking is what percentage of oral dhh kids ever graduate (meaning speak so well they no longer require speech/language services in their IEP) from speech therapy. I doubt there's ANYONE(or very few people) who continue speech therapy, after graduation from high school"

Since by your own admission HS graduates do not continue speech therapy (and many discontinue it prior to graduation), it seems that you have answered your own question.
Click to expand...
 
doubletrouble said:
Shel.. this is one point I hate to disagree with you on, but I must. In my personal case, you absolutely can compare a deaf child to a hearing child. You see, my deaf son has a hearing twin brother (fraternal)... My deaf son was implanted at 11 months.. .and then got his second implant at the age of 5. He is growing up in the same exact enviroment as my hearing son... same parents.. same family..... Here's the kicker......... when it comes to language (comphrension and acquisition) my DEAF son is 2 LEVELS above my hearing son... My deaf son is reading above grade level (where my hearing son is at grade level)... My deaf son is at the top of his class, my hearing son is at grade level....In my personal experience, implanting a child earlier and with a great support system, I think that the risk of failure is low... Just my personal opinion... And with that said.. I have 5 nephews and a niece who are implanted..... all at various ages.... not one failure at all...... Just my 2 cents!
Click to expand...

doubletrouble,

Very interesting post and do not sell yourself short, it is definitely worth a whole nickel! :)

With seven implanted children in your family, wow, if they were implanted at different ages do you see any differences? Also, do you see any differences amongst any of the children who were implanted at or around the same age?
Rick
 
rick48 said:
doubletrouble,

Very interesting post and do not sell yourself short, it is definitely worth a whole nickel! :)

With seven implanted children in your family, wow, if they were implanted at different ages do you see any differences? Also, do you see any differences amongst any of the children who were implanted at or around the same age?
Rick
Click to expand...

:giggle:
Yes, I do see major differences... My son was the first one out of the bunch.. he was also the youngest... For him, his speech is sooooo clear that there is no deaf inflections at all... THe older children, most definitely.. they still sound deaf and rely on sign language in school (meaning have the assistnace of an interpreter).. For my son, there is no interpreter...

Shel:

When his implants are off, he still is able to carry on conversations with hearing people... He is an awesome lip reader ( of which I know is a skill).. There have been times at the dinner table we are having a conversation with my son , and he is able to go along and participate... it's not until somerone speaks to him in another room (and he doesn't answer) that we find out that he has his implants offf......As much as he cherishes sound, he also says he loves the silence.... My son is not hearing... even with his implants on..He is and will always be a deaf child... It's part of who he is and I wouldn't change that for anything.... But my son accepts his deafness and embraces it, as well as being able to hear with the implants on. He does know sign.. (more receptively than expressivley)... but does not rely on it at all... He uses it to have conversations with his grandparents who are Deaf, as well as some of his cousins (who were implanted much later in life)...

And in terms of failure..... well even if a deaf person is able to hear enviromental sounds around them, to me that's a success!!
 
Back
Top