Why adults choose CI's for their children

Status
Not open for further replies.
rockdrummer said:
I respect your opinion but we both know that nobody has a crystal ball you you really can only speculate on what may have happened if your parents chose a CI for you early on in life. If you believe your own speculation then how can you account for the many success stories that we hear about?
Click to expand...

How do you account for the number of less than successful cases we continue to see? How do you account for the number of CI students that still require accommodations of a visual nature in a mainstreamed environment?

Again, in order to quantify these "success" stories, you will need to come up with an operational definition of success. Is reading at a 4th grade level success? Is delayed psychosocial development success? Is getting 60% of the curriculum success? How are you defining success. Doing "good enough"? Personally, I define success as being provided with the opportunity and environment that allows one to function based on their innate potential. If a deaf child has an IQ of 100, there is no reason why they should not be functioning at the same level as a hearing child with an IQ of 100. The reason they don't is because the environment they are in does not provide the opportunity for them to use the innate ability to their advantage.
 
faire_jour said:
Is it so terrible that they want to share their language with their child, and they believe that technology has now given them that opportunity?
Click to expand...
No it's not. And for those that enjoy success with the CI it's exactly what they hoped for. One thing to remember is that not everyone with a CI has the same results. My advise is to be prepared and have a backup plan in case it doesn't work.
 
rockdrummer said:
No it's not. And for those that enjoy success with the CI it's exactly what they hoped for. One thing to remember is that not everyone with a CI has the same results. My advise is to be prepared and have a backup plan in case it doesn't work.
Click to expand...

The thing is, no one has accused any parent of being "wrong" for wanting to share their language with their child. Sharing, however, is a 2 way street.

For instance, (and I try very hard not to interject my experience with my child on these discussions), I share my English language with my son. I have always done so. I want him to have the enjoyment of classical literature, of the modern novel, and of reading a newspaper. In order to do that, I have shared my English language with him.

By the same token, he has shared his language, the language of signs, with me. I am grateful for that dyadic sharing experience, as it allows us to communicate in a natural, give and take, way with a mutual understanding.

The point is, we cannot just give our language to our children and call it sharing. We must also make every attempt to enter into their world, and share that. To do otherwise is not sharing. It is imposition.
 
Cloggy said:
The people Lotte comes in contact with don't realise she's deaf. But it's not them I talk about.

Many people on AllDeaf need to emphasise that even though the child can hear, she/he's still deaf. Fine, but in that case.... what's the definition of "deaf"...?

I can say Lotte is deaf based on the the fact that she was not able to hear anything when she was born.
Nowadays, she can hear. In fact, she even hears with her CI's off.!
Click to expand...
jillio said:
"The people Lotte comes in contact with don't realise she's deaf."
And it is truly a shame that you don't see the problem in that.
Click to expand...
Sorry. I don't have a need to have Lotte go around with a sign on her forehead that reads "Deaf".
Sorry. No need from my side to start every conversation with "My child is deaf".


So, is that the problem for you... If someone is deaf he/she better makes sure that everyone can see he/she is deaf?
 
jillio said:
.............
I read some very interesting research earlier today.
Click to expand...
Sounds interesting. Care to share the source?

jillio said:
.............

1. I want to use the easiest method (for me) of communicating with child.

2. I want to use the method of communication in which I am most skilled.

3. I want to use the language which is most likely to be useful to my child in the future.

4. I want to use the most effective way of communicating with my child.

The first two statements that most parents strongly agreed with indicate clearly that it is the needs of the parent, rather than the child, that motivates communication choice. The second two statements that were agreed to very strongly by most hearing parents indicate a judgement again made from the experience of the parent's language, and not from the perspective of the child's needs.
Click to expand...

Best thing that can happen for the child is that the parents are / feel empowered.
This can happen because the parents establish communication by learning a new way of communicating her own language (like Cued Speech) or by learning a totally new language (like signlanguage).
Whatever choice, when the parents are confident that communication is established, most of the race is done.

And since 97% of deaf children are born from hearing parents, I guess "speech" will be the "answer" to most of the statements.

Speaking for ourself,
1: Signlanguage. (Cued Speech is not available in Norwegian, and not established really in Dutch.)
2: Speech & hearing
3: Speech & hearing
4: Speech & hearing. That is the goal. Perhaps it will change to another way.
 
rockdrummer said:
I would recommend reading this article. It's about CI's and deafness in Australia but much of what it talks about carries over. I'ts a bit long but worth the read.

Sound Decision - do children get bionic ears too young?
Click to expand...
Interesting read.
Have to note that it's almost 10 years old.
With CI depending on computer soft- and hard-ware, one has to take into account that a lot has changed.
Do you remember the computer and software from 10 years ago?

Still, excellent points.!
Thanks for sharing the article
 
jillio said:
...........I have a question that will no doubt get me banned, but I am going to ask it again. Why is it, instead of opening their minds and actually attempting to process information that is available through research, people resort to name calling in an attempt to refute it? Why is it that people claim to have the best interest of children at heart, yet totally ignore the information that could actually benefit the children they claim to be concerned about? Is it because it is easier just to hang onto outdated methodologies and ideas that have been shown, time and time again to be less than effective? Or is it because they simply don't want to put forth the effort to learn? Is it just more comfortable to accept less than adequate educational policy for deaf children than to speak out against the inequality?
Click to expand...
Wondering about the same thing...

(And really... this is not a question that will get you banned... Why would you think that..??)
 
Cloggy said:
Sorry. I don't have a need to have Lotte go around with a sign on her forehead that reads "Deaf".
Sorry. No need from my side to start every conversation with "My child is deaf".


So, is that the problem for you... If someone is deaf he/she better makes sure that everyone can see he/she is deaf?
Click to expand...

You missed my point entirely.:roll:
 
Cloggy said:
Sounds interesting. Care to share the source?



Best thing that can happen for the child is that the parents are / feel empowered.
This can happen because the parents establish communication by learning a new way of communicating her own language (like Cued Speech) or by learning a totally new language (like signlanguage).
Whatever choice, when the parents are confident that communication is established, most of the race is done.

And since 97% of deaf children are born from hearing parents, I guess "speech" will be the "answer" to most of the statements.

Speaking for ourself,
1: Signlanguage. (Cued Speech is not available in Norwegian, and not established really in Dutch.)
2: Speech & hearing
3: Speech & hearing
4: Speech & hearing. That is the goal. Perhaps it will change to another way.
Click to expand...

I've already shared the source, cloggy.

Uh, the answers were "strongly agree", "agree", "somewhat agree", "somewhat disagree", "disagree", and "strongly disagree". Speech and hearing were not options.
 
shel90 said:
Should we look at everything from the success of few and apply educational policies based on few cases?
Get bullied? Nobody is threatening anyone nor calling anyone names unless I missed something.
Click to expand...

Why the heck would you do that? Sacrificing the many so a few can succeed has been tried before. It doesn't work.
 
Cloggy said:
Sorry. I don't have a need to have Lotte go around with a sign on her forehead that reads "Deaf".
Sorry. No need from my side to start every conversation with "My child is deaf".

So, is that the problem for you... If someone is deaf he/she better makes sure that everyone can see he/she is deaf?
Click to expand...

I can relate. I've never felt the need to broadcast the fact that I'm deaf, at least not out in the real world -- whether in school, applying for jobs, being at a restaurant, etc. It just creates an unnecessary stigma. I don't think that parents that opt for a CI for their child is hoping to "hide" the fact their child is deaf (maybe some do for reasons of their own that I don't understand, but generally speaking ..,) but rather to improve their level of hearing and communication.

I have said many times in other threads that I'm a proponent of the full toolbox for every deaf child (deaf whether with CIs, HAs, or nothing,) but I think nobody can deny that if you have more hearing, your communication options will likely improve. I'm sure I'm going to get flak for this because I am fully aware that the level of (increased) hearing isn't always proportional to the level of (increased) communication -- because I know of people personally who have a CI and they still choose not to speak, they remain fully ASL, and vice versa. I do, however, strongly believe there is a correlation between increased hearing and increased communication. It's the very reason I'm considering a CI myself. I speak fairly well now as it is, but I can only hear minimally with HAs and have practically no speech discrimination. It is my hope that if I do indeed opt for a CI, that my level of hearing will improve and my speech discrimination as well -- therefore putting me in a increased/improved situation, that I can finally participate in team meetings and have a better chance at getting a decent job, understanding people in restaurants without the awkwardness of not understanding the waitstaff, and even understanding my teachers and peers in school (since I am going back to school in January.) And so on ..
 
Cloggy said:
Interesting read.
Have to note that it's almost 10 years old.
With CI depending on computer soft- and hard-ware, one has to take into account that a lot has changed.
Do you remember the computer and software from 10 years ago?

Still, excellent points.!
Thanks for sharing the article
Click to expand...
yeah I did want to mention the age. You are right about the older technology. My comment about the comparisons were more about the non-technical issues that were discussed. Working in the field of technology I know that 10 years can see 5 or six generations and possibly even a revolution.
 
AlleyCat said:
I can relate. I've never felt the need to broadcast the fact that I'm deaf, at least not out in the real world -- whether in school, applying for jobs, being at a restaurant, etc. It just creates an unnecessary stigma. I don't think that parents that opt for a CI for their child is hoping to "hide" the fact their child is deaf (maybe some do for reasons of their own that I don't understand, but generally speaking ..,) but rather to improve their level of hearing and communication.

I have said many times in other threads that I'm a proponent of the full toolbox for every deaf child (deaf whether with CIs, HAs, or nothing,) but I think nobody can deny that if you have more hearing, your communication options will likely improve. I'm sure I'm going to get flak for this because I am fully aware that the level of (increased) hearing isn't always proportional to the level of (increased) communication -- because I know of people personally who have a CI and they still choose not to speak, they remain fully ASL, and vice versa. I do, however, strongly believe there is a correlation between increased hearing and increased communication. It's the very reason I'm considering a CI myself. I speak fairly well now as it is, but I can only hear minimally with HAs and have practically no speech discrimination. It is my hope that if I do indeed opt for a CI, that my level of hearing will improve and my speech discrimination as well -- therefore putting me in a increased/improved situation, that I can finally participate in team meetings and have a better chance at getting a decent job, understanding people in restaurants without the awkwardness of not understanding the waitstaff, and even understanding my teachers and peers in school (since I am going back to school in January.) And so on ..
Click to expand...
All excellent points.
 
Reading back a ways I came across this and just thought it was worth reposting.

Cloggy said:
Is there a way to frame Ricks post in AllDeaf...??? For all to see and to read before going any further.!!
Click to expand...

rick48 said:
I do not think that "defensive" is the right word. I think what you are experiencing are parents who are willing to stand up and passionately correct the misinformation and myths constantly being spread about cis. I also think that the issue of cis for children strikes right at the heart of the parent/child relationship and naturally evokes a response.

If you can name any other area where people more frequently comment upon how parents should raise their children and question the decisions parents make for their children then cis, please let me know for I doubt there are many others.

Personally, we made our ci decision in 1989 and were called child abusers, Nazis, been told that we neither love our child, understand our child, nor accept her for who she is. We have been told that we are trying to turn her into something she is not, and of course there are those who advocated that deaf children, like our daughter, should not be raised by hearing parents at all but placed in residential schools for the deaf to be raised by "Deaf Role Models". Heck, I even sat across from the former head of the NAD on TV who stated it was wrong for us to have implanted our daughter.

With what other issue does this occur? Where else do you have people routinely tell parents that the decision they made for their child is wrong and how they are raising their child is incorrect?

Throughout the years I have met hundreds of parents who have either implanted their children or considered the implant for their child and universally they put a lot of time and effort into that decision and it was not one that they reached without a lot of careful consideration. In general, they were good and decent parents trying to do what they believe is best for their child. They know their children better then anyone else. That is why, when you stop and think about it, it is rare that you have a ci parent comment negatively upon a parent's decision not to implant their child or state that the parent should have implanted the child. However, some of us will react passionately and strongly to those who attack the implant or question the right of a parent to make the decision for their child.

True, a lot has changed in the last 18 years but there is still a long way to go. We still have those who cannot accept the fact that there are parents of successful ci children who chose a path that differs from the one they chose for their child or for themselves. Thus, even when they begrudgingly acknowledge the ci's benefits for children it is often coupled with the dire obligatory warning of some doom and gloom event that the child "may" later experience.

Therefore, when I read things like you should not implant your child because they won't be able to scuba dive deeper then 100 yards or become an astronaut or play sports, I still sit there and roll my eyes and shake my head. I know the ci is not for everyone and that not everyone will be able to benefit from it but I will not stand by and let misinformation go by unchallenged because it is too important to the parent out there who may be reading it and trying to make the ci decision for their child.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
rockdrummer said:
Reading back a ways I came across this and just thought it was worth reposting.
Click to expand...

If u feel something is worth reposting, next time pls remove my name cuz it makes me look like I was the one who said all these things to Rick when it couldn't be furthur from the truth.*sighs*

I am still against the "wait and see" approaches in the educational setting. I prefer to adopt the safeguard approach.
 
Cloggy said:
Which is......:roll:Excellent. What was it? (Couldn't find it in your posts of today..:roll:)

Ah, thanks....
Click to expand...

If you couldn't find it, you have not looked far enough back.

No use explaining the meaning to you. I'm certain the explanation would be just as lost on you as the original point is.

But I would like to ask you a question: Since you claim that you don't feel the need to announce to anyone that your daughter is deaf, and that it is not an issue, why the blog that does just that? That's just a tad hypocritical, don't you think?
 
shel90 said:
If u feel something is worth reposting, next time pls remove my name cuz it makes me look like I was the one who said all these things to Rick when it couldn't be furthur from the truth.*sighs*

I am still against the "wait and see" approaches in the educational setting. I prefer to adopt the safeguard approach.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Wait and see what? Wait and see how far behind a child can get and still have a decent chance at catching up at some point in time?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top