Why adults choose CI's for their children

[jillio]

So...
.... providing a simple link to the original articles is too much effort....

Thanks for your help and effort of sharing!!

We'll just take your word for it that the information is out there... :roll:

When I read it some time ago, and would have to do an academic search in order to provide you with a link, yes. Make the effort for yourself.

And, you seem to forget, cloggy, that I emailed you an article you requested from me.

You don't have to take my word that the information is out there. All you have to do is use your computer for something other than posting on a message board.

 

[Cloggy]

Good post Jillio!!

We chose to implant our child for a variety of reasons that I am sure most (God forbid I say all) of the parents here would agree with..

To give her spoken language

Because we are hearing.. no different than a deaf couple hoping for a deaf child...

To give her the gift of hearing..she is the only person in our family with rhythm, lol..she loves music, etc

I find it sad that it took this long to realize that she would have been THAT MUCH BETTER OFF if we would have given her the gift of sign as well. As she ages and I watch the struggles in the classroom - academically as well as socially - I am saddened to think that it did not occur to me to question the "experts" that told us ASL should be avoided..all in the name of helping her acquire spoken language..

I never for a minute have second guessed the choice to implant her and if in the future she does not wish to use it, her choice, GREAT!! I will know I provided her with the choice...

Likewise, I should give her a language that is "natural" for her. Why is that such a hot topic here? She IS still deaf!!

Signlanguage can always be started. With or without CI. Go for it!

 

[rick48]

Why is that such a hot topic here? She IS still deaf!!

It is because there are some people here who adopt a "one size fits all" approach to deaf children and bandy about terms like "all" and "any' and "every" instead of acknowledging that all these children are unique individuals and what works for one child may not work for another child likewise what does not work for one child may indeed work for another.

I think we all understand that our children are deaf but that there are some who are raising deaf children who do prefer to speak and who are comfortable in a hearing environment. That is not a denial that these children are deaf just that they have taken a different path towards becoming all that they can be and it is a path that is just as "natural" for them as well.

 

[jillio]

Signlanguage can always be started. With or without CI. Go for it!

She already has.

 

[jillio]

How is it that a child who has been exposed to only one language has a choice which language would be more natural? If there is only one language in the environment, there is no choice. The child is forced to use the only language that is available. That is not a choice. A choice requires that there be more than one option from which to choose.

 

[rick48]

In any case it will be a journey.... No matter what choice one makes. It's just a different direction. And in the end a different view. Who is to decide one choice is better than the other..

You are so right!

 

[samanthasmom]

So...
.... providing a simple link to the original articles is too much effort....

Thanks for your help and effort of sharing!!

We'll just take your word for it that the information is out there... :roll:


In any case it will be a journey.... No matter what choice one makes. It's just a different direction. And in the end a different view. Who is to decide one choice is better than the other..

Gosh, i still don't get why people are so quick to eat each other here.. Jillio has offered the links, MANY times. If they are too large to post why are people too lazy to receive it in email?! It has been offered more than once.

It IS always a journey. I think the question is (like it always seems to be here) Why do most of the (NOT ALL, DO NOT FLAME ME) parents of kids with CIs only want to hear the "great " things about them? What if the child does not bridge the gap between "hearing age" and "chronological age"? Why is it that we are not allowed to bridge that topic?

 

[Cloggy]

It is because there are some people here who adopt a "one size fits all" approach to deaf children and bandy about terms like "all" and "any' and "every" instead of acknowledging that all these children are unique individuals and what works for one child may not work for another child likewise what does not work for one child may indeed work for another.
........

Exactly.... like .."all children that are taught signlanguage are doing great" and "few children with CI are doing well". (And it's true because of the 200 articles I read in order to come to that conclusion... no need to back it up...)

 

[rick48]

How is it that a child who has been exposed to only one language has a choice which language would be more natural? If there is only one language in the environment, there is no choice. The child is forced to use the only language that is available. That is not a choice. A choice requires that there be more than one option from which to choose.

Sorry but you don't seem to get the point as you are confusing "natural" with choice. Two very different concepts.

If you are correct then we did not give our hearing daughter any choice of language so under your "logic" her use of spoken English is "unnatural" for her.

Also, if a deaf child of deaf parents is exposed only to ASL by them, then under your "logic" that child was forced to use the only language made available to him/her in the environment and thus, that child's use of ASL is not "natural".

Of course it makes perfect sense to someone who only views this issue in absolutes with no allowance for the fact that all children, even deaf children, are unique individuals.

 

[Cloggy]

Gosh, i still don't get why people are so quick to eat each other here.. Jillio has offered the links, MANY times. If they are too large to post why are people too lazy to receive it in email?! It has been offered more than once.

My apologies,
I came in this thread late. I simply asked for the name of the article that she claimed she just read. That morning.
Couldn't find it, and asked her to give me a title. I didn't ask for the complete text....
I considered that article to be interesting, and as the parent of a deaf child, I would like to read it...

It IS always a journey. I think the question is (like it always seems to be here) Why do most of the (NOT ALL, DO NOT FLAME ME) parents of kids with CIs only want to hear the "great " things about them? What if the child does not bridge the gap between "hearing age" and "chronological age"? Why is it that we are not allowed to bridge that topic?

Very much allowed to bridge it..... please do. Problem is there are too many parties that see it from only one side... Rick, DrewsDad, me, we see our child thrive on CI, thanks to a lot of hard work.
Other people see children that have little benefit.
Time to find someone to provide a realistic view from both sides...

 

[rick48]

Gosh, i still don't get why people are so quick to eat each other here.. Jillio has offered the links, MANY times.

And yet, the one constant is people asking her to cite her research and her refusal to do so with the claim that she already has.

 

[samanthasmom]

Actually, everytime that I have asked she has provided. Maybe you do not know how to contact her?

 

[jillio]

Regarding the issues of an oral only, mainstreamed environment, Nunes, Pretzlik, and Olsson (Journal of Deaf Education International,3, 123-136, 2007) found that while deaf students did not encounter undue negative reactions from hearing peers, hearing peers from the study preferred a hearing peer as a friend. The likelihood of a deaf student being chosen as a guest to play at home with was proportionately smaller than that of a hearing student. The same was observed for mutual positive nominations: deaf students were less likely to have a friend in the same class as the hearing students.

There was significant difference in the deaf and hearing children's patterns of friendship found in previous research by Ledeberg, Rosenblatt, Vandell, and Chapin (1987). Whereas the most prevelant pattern in hearing friendships was long term, deaf children's friendships most commonly were sporadic. It has been suggested that this pattern of instability is cause for concern (Nunes, Pretzlik, & Olson, 2007).

 

[Cloggy]

Regarding the issues of an oral only, mainstreamed environment, Nunes, Pretzlik, and Olsson (Journal of Deaf Education International,3, 123-136, 2007) found that while deaf students did not encounter undue negative reactions from hearing peers, hearing peers from the study preferred a hearing peer as a friend. The likelihood of a deaf student being chosen as a guest to play at home with was proportionately smaller than that of a hearing student. The same was observed for mutual positive nominations: deaf students were less likely to have a friend in the same class as the hearing students.

There was significant difference in the deaf and hearing children's patterns of friendship found in previous research by Ledeberg, Rosenblatt, Vandell, and Chapin (1987). Whereas the most prevelant pattern in hearing friendships was long term, deaf children's friendships most commonly were sporadic. It has been suggested that this pattern of instability is cause for concern (Nunes, Pretzlik, & Olson, 2007).

There you go... back on topic..!
The "why-adults-choose-cis-their-children" question solved...
Thanks Jillio.!
(btw.... those "deaf students"... could they hear or not...???)

[Mod's Edit - Previous quote removed and comment removed - retailing/provoking]

 

[jillio]

Sorry but you don't seem to get the point as you are confusing "natural" with choice. Two very different concepts.

If you are correct then we did not give our hearing daughter any choice of language so under your "logic" her use of spoken English is "unnatural" for her.

Also, if a deaf child of deaf parents is exposed only to ASL by them, then under your "logic" that child was forced to use the only language made available to him/her in the environment and thus, that child's use of ASL is not "natural".

Of course it makes perfect sense to someone who only views this issue in absolutes with no allowance for the fact that all children, even deaf children, are unique individuals.

Not suggesting that it is unnatural for her at all. In fact, it is quite natural, as it is all she was exposed to. Of course it would seem natural. There is no point for comparison.

And a hearing child exposed only to ASL will indeed see that as natural. However, a hearing child of deaf parents cannot avoid being exposed to spoken language as well as signed language. A deaf child in an oral only environment does not have the opportunity to be exposed to a second language.

So, you see, you have misread my word. I said it could not be a natural choice made by a child when the choice is not available to the child. That is entirely different that a child accepting the only thing they are exposed to as natural.

 

[faire_jour]

So if it's all about choices and options, should a deaf parent of a deaf child HAVE TO give their child speech and listening therapy? How do they know they they wouldn't choose to use spoken language? Isn't that as restrictive as oral only?

 

[Cloggy]

Not suggesting that it is unnatural for her at all. In fact, it is quite natural, as it is all she was exposed to. Of course it would seem natural. There is no point for comparison.

And a hearing child exposed only to ASL will indeed see that as natural. However, a hearing child of deaf parents cannot avoid being exposed to spoken language as well as signed language. A deaf child in an oral only environment does not have the opportunity to be exposed to a second language.

So, you see, you have misread my word. I said it could not be a natural choice made by a child when the choice is not available to the child. That is entirely different that a child accepting the only thing they are exposed to as natural.

In all, the child cannot make the choice. The parent has to do that for the child.
Lotte did have a choice eventually. We started with sign (without asking her... sorry), and when we gave her CI (again - we didn't ask her.. sorry), she herself used speech/hearing increasingly more than sign, eventually not using sign at all.
In that sense, providing hearing is providing choice.

 

[jillio]

So if it's all about choices and options, should a deaf parent of a deaf child HAVE TO give their child speech and listening therapy? How do they know they they wouldn't choose to use spoken language? Isn't that as restrictive as oral only?

Why would it be restrictive? A deaf child of a deaf parent receives linguistic input from the time of birth, and they do not suffer the language delays created by being in an environment where language is not 100% accessable to them. A deaf child in a oral only environment is certainly not in the same situation as a deaf child in a deaf environment. One has complete access to language, one does not. As a result, one does not suffer delays in acquisition that lead to compounded problems in academic functioning. The other does.

 

[samanthasmom]

There you go... back on topic..!
The "why-adults-choose-cis-their-children" question solved...
Thanks Jillio.!
(btw.... those "deaf students"... could they hear or not...???)

[Mod's Edit - unnecessary comment thus provoking/retailing]

btw... those "deaf students" ... that STILL refers to my child with bilateral implants. Whether you (as a parent) choose to acknowledge it or not - she is still deaf...the other students in her class recognize it, as does she.

 

[jillio]

btw... those "deaf students" ... that STILL refers to my child with bilateral implants. Whether you (as a parent) choose to acknowledge it or not - she is still deaf...the other students in her class recognize it, as does she.

Exactly.