Why adults choose CI's for their children

[Oceanbreeze]

I'm just playing devil's advocate so....what if the hearing parents never learn more than a handful of signs?

Then, the child is at a severe disadvantage. Sadly, that seems to be the case most of the time; especially with children with CIs.

 

[faire_jour]

But my question is, is it better to have a hearing parent implant a child and have that child be whatever level of successful with a shared language with the family, being able to interact, communicate and learn from the parents OR have a child without access to sound and questionable results using ASL, because they were provided no language at home, unable to communicate with their family, feel completly shut out from their parents, and having no common language at all?

Which is the greater evil?

CI oral only child or non-CI signing child, with a family who can't sign...

 

[rockdrummer]

I'm just playing devil's advocate so....what if the hearing parents never learn more than a handful of signs?

Or it takes them years to become proficient. That seems to be at the expense of the child acquiring language because it's been stated many times there is a window of opportunity for a child to efficiently acquire language. So an early decision to go one way or the other is important.

 

[rockdrummer]

Maybe in non-ideal situations..like one on one situations but in reality one_on_one situations can't occur at all times in the classroom . If the parents can provide that constantly in the home, great but in the education setting, there can't be a teacher for every child with a CI and that's where ASL will be very helpful. When learning takes place, it is important for all the deaf kids to have equal access to everything like hearing kids and since in a classroom full of 30 plus kids, I dunoo how much a child who is still developing language with a CI can understand everything. If they can't, then they end up missing out what is being said around them. To me, that's not having full access like the hearing kids do. And we know in many public schools, overcrowding is a major problem for the classroom teacher.

My question was more about if the brain could process spoken language with a CI and not necessarily about exposure to language.

 

[AlleyCat]

I'm just playing devil's advocate so....what if the hearing parents never learn more than a handful of signs?

A lot of ASL exposure comes from the school and their deaf peers, doesn't it? If the child does know sign language, then they use it with their peers if there are any that know sign (and others, such as teachers who use sign, IEP teachers, interpeters, etc.) I speak from experience -- the majority of my sign use growing up was with my peers, not my family. My mom learned the most, but that was still the basics, more or less. My dad and sister learned less. I didn't see it as important because I used sign at school, and after school, and on weekends with peers. Did I mis-read the original question?

 

[rockdrummer]

Then, the child is at a severe disadvantage. Sadly, that seems to be the case most of the time; especially with children with CIs.

How so? Do you mean kids with CI's that have gained no benefit AND their parents haven't learned sign?

 

[web730]

Or it takes them years to become proficient. That seems to be at the expense of the child acquiring language because it's been stated many times there is a window of opportunity for a child to efficiently acquire language. So an early decision to go one way or the other is important.

That's the big reason why ASL is the best early intervention tool before teaching the deaf child anything else like practicing oral using CI or HA... and then learning English more efficient even.

So ASL provides the ultimate tool for the deaf child to learn anything, absolutely.

The earlier, the better of course. For those hearing parents who don't know signs... start learning ASL now and use ASL to teach their deaf baby immediately.

 

[shel90]

I'm just playing devil's advocate so....what if the hearing parents never learn more than a handful of signs?

All for a better reason for the child to go to a school where he/she has full access to language.

If my brother was kept in an oral-only program all his life when he wasn't able to pick up on spoken language and my parents not knowing sign even to this day, he wouldn't be where he is now. He is VEY VERY lucky someone at my public school was able to recognize that he wasn't thriving being mainstreamed with little access to everything before it was way too late like it is for so many other deaf kids of parents who don't sign.

In the home, I can't do much about what goes on but we, educators, have the power to provide an environment that is accessible for the children. If the child doesn't have access to muich both at home and at school, iam sorry to say..the child will have serious deficients in their language and struggle with literacy skills. That is what has happened to so many of our students who got referred to our program at a later age. They do not even have a first language at the age of 9, 10, or even older. If they do, it is usually very very weak. Don't we want to prevent that risk for all children in the educational setting?

Wishful thinking, I wud love for the children to have full access to language at home but in reality, it hasn't happened. The lucky few have parents who take the time to learn sign language but even if they aren't fluent, I see the difference in those children's language, cognitive, and abstract thinking than those who don't have access to language at home.

The point is, as an educator, I refuse to take risks like these with children's language like that in the school setting. That's my belife and philosphy..the educational setting is there to meet the children's needs not vice versa but too often it is vice versa for many mainstreamed deaf children who do not have full access to everything that is happening around them at school.

Again, I am using my pager so if u see a lot of typos, my apologies.

 

[shel90]

Or it takes them years to become proficient. That seems to be at the expense of the child acquiring language because it's been stated many times there is a window of opportunity for a child to efficiently acquire language. So an early decision to go one way or the other is important.

Then if the child isnt able to pick up on spoken language parallel to his/her hearing counterparts, the child is the one who pays the price.

At least with a strong language with ASL, the child will more likely to have better success with literacy skills.

 

[shel90]

That's the big reason why ASL is the best early intervention tool before teaching the deaf child anything else like practicing oral using CI or HA... and then learning English more efficient even.

So ASL provides the ultimate tool for the deaf child to learn anything, absolutely.

The earlier, the better of course. For those hearing parents who don't know signs... start learning ASL now and use ASL to teach their deaf baby immediately.

And that has been the critical emphasis to many of our parents in the infant/toddler programs and resources to help them to learn ASL are given/offered.

 

[shel90]

How so? Do you mean kids with CI's that have gained no benefit AND their parents haven't learned sign?

Oh, those are the kids I see getting referred to our program as a last resort. That's why they have low reading levels.

 

[faire_jour]

Still waiting for someone to answer my question....

 

[rockdrummer]

The earlier, the better of course. For those hearing parents who don't know signs... start learning ASL now and use ASL to teach their deaf baby immediately.

That was my erliar point. You can't just snap your fingers and become a fluent signer. That takes years and it might be another reason a parent would opt for a CI. If the CI is successful then the child may be exposed to a fluent language earlier on.

 

[shel90]

My question was more about if the brain could process spoken language with a CI and not necessarily about exposure to language.

I was able to process spoken language without a CI with a bilateral dB loss of 120 in both ears since birth.

 

[shel90]

A lot of ASL exposure comes from the school and their deaf peers, doesn't it? If the child does know sign language, then they use it with their peers if there are any that know sign (and others, such as teachers who use sign, IEP teachers, interpeters, etc.) I speak from experience -- the majority of my sign use growing up was with my peers, not my family. My mom learned the most, but that was still the basics, more or less. My dad and sister learned less. I didn't see it as important because I used sign at school, and after school, and on weekends with peers. Did I mis-read the original question?

U are very right about that. Better for the child to have full access to language at the school setting than none both at the home or at the school.

 

[rockdrummer]

Then if the child isnt able to pick up on spoken language parallel to his/her hearing counterparts, the child is the one who pays the price.

At least with a strong language with ASL, the child will more likely to have better success with literacy skills.

Couldn't you say the same things for a access to spoken language if the CI proves beneficial.

 

[shel90]

Couldn't you say the same things for a access to spoken language if the CI proves beneficial.

If so, can a child with a CI hear everything that is being said in a large classroom full of hearing kids debating, answering questions, and etc at a rapid pace? If not, then the child gets left out and access to education is taken away from the child.

If the child can process spoken English like I did but has a one-on-one teacher for every class all the way to high school, great..then all the problems are solved but unfortunately, it is not realistic especially with the budget cuts happening lately.

 

[jillio]

Interesting points on how the brain processes languages. I would have to imagine opting for a CI, one would have spoken language as a primary goal. If the CI is successful, (don't make me qualify that) then wouldn't the brain be able to process spoken language?

That's a question that cannot be answered with a simple yes or no, particularly without an operational definition of success.

 

[shel90]

Still waiting for someone to answer my question....

Which question is that..I thought I answered it. Was there another one that I overlooked?

 

[shel90]

That's a question that cannot be answered with a simple yes or no, particularly without an operational definition of success.

Everyone has a different definition of what "success" is.