Why CI is bad for kids under 6 yrs.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Amazing how some people, who 90 minutes ago were claiming the NAD's position paper supporting a parent's right to choose a cochlear implant for their child did not even exist, have now annointed themselves as self-proclaimed experts on that very same position paper.

Bottomline is that the NAD, contrary to the rantings and ravings of anti-ci posters, supports the right of a well informed parent to choose a cochlear implant for their child.

If anyone has a beef with that, take it up with the NAD and not me.

And so in honor of my France bound younger daughter-- bon soir et au revoir!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lumbingmi View Post
Hmm.. I just went to NAD webiste and type in their search feature - cochlear implant and I can't find anything that they support what you said.
Nor could I.

I knew it..

Unbelievable.. rick48 is lying teeth..

Where is it hard proof that NAD is support 100% for CI..

I'm laughing on the floor.. at you Rick48.
What afraid your answer..
Your throat getting big GULPING..

I understandable.. you shaking your pant!
 
The NAD position paper also says:

Parents have the right to know about and understand the various options available, including all factors that might impact development. While there are some successes with implants, success stories should not be over-generalized to every individual.

and this:
The NAD recognizes all technological advancements with the potential to foster, enhance, and improve the quality of life of all deaf and hard of hearing persons. During the past three decades, technological developments such as closed captioning, email and the Internet, two-way pagers, text telephones, telecommunications relay services, video interpreting services, visual alerting devices, vibro-tactile devices, hearing aids, amplification devices, audio loop and listening systems have had an important role in leveling the playing field. The role of the cochlear implant in this regard is evolving and will certainly change in the future. Cochlear implants are not appropriate for all deaf and hard of hearing children and adults. Cochlear implantation is a technology that represents a tool to be used in some forms of communication, and not a cure for deafness. Cochlear implants provide sensitive hearing, but do not, by themselves, impart the ability to understand spoken language through listening alone. In addition, they do not guarantee the development of cognition or reduce the benefit of emphasis on parallel visual language and literacy development.

and this:

Despite the pathological view of deafness held by many within the medical profession, parents would benefit by seeking out opportunities to meet and get to know successful deaf and hard of hearing children and adults who are fluent in sign language and English, both with and without implants. The NAD encourages parents and deaf adults to research other options besides implantation. If implantation is the option of choice, parents should obtain all information about the surgical procedure, surgical risks, post-surgical auditory and speech training requirements, and potential benefits and limitations so as to make informed decisions.

and this:

Further improvements to cochlear implant technology and greater experience with educating and supporting pre-lingually deafened children and adults may later result in better outcomes for both of these populations than are achieved at present. In the meantime, though, parents of deaf and hard of hearing children need to be aware that a decision to forego implantation for their children does not condemn their children to a world of meaningless silence. Regardless of whether or not a deaf or hard of hearing child receives an implant, the child will function within both the hearing and the deaf communities. For these reasons, parents of pre-lingually deaf children presently have a reasonable basis upon which to decline implantation for their child. Parents must feel comfortable with their decision, whether they choose implantation or not.

and this:

Medical professionals have historically been the first point of contact for parents of deaf children. Their expertise is valuable but is primarily limited only to their medical areas of expertise. They should not be viewed as, nor should they function as, experts with regard to larger issues such as the educational, psychological, social, and linguistic needs of the deaf child. Medical professionals may be experts regarding the mysteries of the inner ear, but they are not experts regarding the inner lives of deaf children and adults. Psychological, social, educational, cultural and communication aspects of deafness, including the wellness model, must be a significant part of every medical school curriculum, especially within the specialty of otolaryngology. In-service training programs should be implemented for all interdisciplinary staff at cochlear implant centers that would include guidance and counseling methods with parents of deaf children and adults considering cochlear implants. These training programs should be conducted by professional counselors who are trained, qualified, and competent to work and communicate with deaf and hard of hearing children and adults and their families.

and this:
Deafness is irreversible. Even with the implant and increased sound perception, the child is still deaf. Cochlear implants are not a cure for deafness. The most serious parental responsibility from the very beginning is total commitment to, and involvement with, their child's overall development and well-being. Throughout the developmental years, the deaf child -- implanted or not, mainstreamed or not --should receive education in deaf studies, including deaf heritage, history of deafness and deaf people, particularly stories and accounts of deaf people who have succeeded in many areas of life.

and this:

The NAD has always and continues to support and endorse innovative educational programming for deaf children, implanted or not. Such programming should actively support the auditory and speech skills of children in a dynamic and interactive visual environment that utilizes sign language and English. In closing, the NAD asserts that diversity in communication modes and cultures is our inherent strength, and that mutual respect and cooperation between deaf, hard of hearing, and hearing individuals ultimately benefit us all.

Paints quite a different picture than one sentence taken totally out of context. In other words, the NAD, and I take the same position. Yes, parents have the right to decide whether to implant or not implant. However, they are doing their child a great disservice by using it as an excuse not to expose the child to sign, deaf studies, deaf heritage, history of deafness, and deaf people. Nor does the decision not to implant resign a child to a world of silence, or of interaction with only the Deaf community.
 
GalaxyAngel said:
No it's truth.. ton ton ton deaf people who have ci.. and angry about their side effects and apporach angry at their parents.. why can't they listen their feelings expression due HELL HEADACHE or pain their head due numbness and so many many..
You have not seen CI teenagers and adult who was implanted when so young... by parent force child..

You don't know! I feel sorry for you... you have no clue!
Why don't you research more find it out about ugly truth about CI..
Good Luck!
Click to expand...

ARE YOU JOKING ME?! how many is "TON TON TON"? That's not even a number. You are looking at the NEGATIVES, not the positives. Besides, there are over 100,000 CI users...how many do you really think have problems? I would say maybe 2%...that's about 200 people. It may seem a lot, but what about the other 98%?! (I really wish I can find data on this...I'll do the research and get back to you. :roll:)

Think about it...think it like a computer...20 years ago, computers were chunky, heavy, PIA, SLOW (heck, my first computer was 75 mhz!! :eek3:). Now, 20 years later - fast, easy, light...SAME analogy to CI!! I can BET you that some of those people who have problems may have one of the following:

1 - Not training...if there's lack of training, there will be issues
2 - HIGH expectations. A few expect to hear on first day..that's not the case
3 - MANY of these people's EARS have never been simulated to sound, hence why it hurts! If I don't wear my hearing aid for a month, then I put it on, it will be very loud and hurt...then after a few days, it will be fine. Same thing for CI. The nerves are like, "WTF?!" at first, then gradually becomes, "More Power! More sound!!"
4 - BAD surgery, misplacement of implant (many were new at doing this type of surgery, and nowadays better pain management, better instruments, technology etc)
5 - Audiologists suck at Mapping
6 - Older implant (maybe in small amount of people?)


Is ALL of them forced by parents? NO. Parents did not have a LOT of information available back then because it was a fairly new technology. CI is NOT for everyone.

Why won't *YOU* do the research? I *know* there's some people that do have issues with their CI, and I do feel bad for them, but I don't judge them.
I know what it is like to have a CI, you don't. You're judging your opinion based on other people's. I respect your opinion that you're against CI in children and maybe adults, but it seems to me that you're looking at the negatives, not the positives. Just don't disrespect OUR decision for getting the implants or parents' implanting their child. That's what America is great for...all about freedom of choices.

Does that mean if I approach you, and I start signing to you and we become friends...after a while, I tell you I have CI, will you not be my friend just because I have CI? That's discrimination, and that's sad you won't be my friend. :-(
 
GalaxyAngel said:
I'm laughing on the floor.. at you Rick48.
What afraid your answer..
Your throat getting big GULPING..

I understandable.. you shaking your pant!
Click to expand...

Read Jillo's post...it did mention CI in there.

Plus - I know you support NAD...how many members do you think have CI? How many board members do you think have CI? How many pageant contestants do you think have CI? Plus, if you support NAD, that means you support their positions about CI.

CI is just a tool, a technology, a device. That's all there is to it.
 
GalaxyAngel said:
.............
for example..
I want my baby remove cochlear and want my baby DEAF..
How hearing people feel and think I'm ABUSE?

spill your bean?

..........
Click to expand...
WOW... YOU are deciding that.???.... what happened to "letting the child decided"?

Still, if your deaf baby can hear with CI, why would you want your baby not to hear?
 
rick48 said:
Amazing how some people, who 90 minutes ago were claiming the NAD's position paper supporting a parent's right to choose a cochlear implant for their child did not even exist, have now annointed themselves as self-proclaimed experts on that very same position paper.

Bottomline is that the NAD, contrary to the rantings and ravings of anti-ci posters, supports the right of a well informed parent to choose a cochlear implant for their child.
Click to expand...

I don't think you are lying up our face saying that NAD supports parents implanting their children, but it looks like you don't understand the difference between the two words "respect" and "support".

"The NAD recognizes the rights of parents to make informed choices for their deaf and hard of hearing children, respects their choice to use cochlear implants and all other assistive devices, and strongly supports the development of the whole child and of language and literacy."

If you now read a bit careful, you will read that NAD respect parents choices, but support bilingualism. They say nowhere they support parents implanting their kids, but are very clear on the use of sign language.

NAD on CI and ASL:
"It is important to recognize that a newly implanted child is unable to understand spoken language through listening alone. Therefore parents and professionals should continue to use sign language to ensure age-appropriate psychological, social, cognitive, and language development."

25 years out of school.. indeed.
 
flip said:
I don't think you are lying up our face saying that NAD supports parents implanting their children, but it looks like you don't understand the difference between the two words "respect" and "support".

"The NAD recognizes the rights of parents to make informed choices for their deaf and hard of hearing children, respects their choice to use cochlear implants and all other assistive devices, and strongly supports the development of the whole child and of language and literacy."

If you now read a bit careful, you will read that NAD respect parents choices, but support bilingualism. They say nowhere they support parents implanting their kids, but are very clear on the use of sign language.
Click to expand...

I read it a bit differently than you and Rick. By saying the NAD "recognizes the rights of parents to make informed choices for their deaf and hard of hearing children", even though they may disagree with the choice to use cochlear implants and/or other devices, they understand that the parents have the absolute right to decide what to do.

Whether they actually support cochlear implants is quite different from them understanding that the parent(s) do have the right to make that decision.

In other words, I agree with Rick because the paper is indicating that the NAD agrees that parents have the right to choose an implant for their child, but I agree with flip that they are not at all truly "respecting" or "supporting" the implant decision.
 
flip said:
I don't think you are lying up our face saying that NAD supports parents implanting their children, but it looks like you don't understand the difference between the two words "respect" and "support".

"The NAD recognizes the rights of parents to make informed choices for their deaf and hard of hearing children, respects their choice to use cochlear implants and all other assistive devices, and strongly supports the development of the whole child and of language and literacy."

If you now read a bit careful, you will read that NAD respect parents choices, but support bilingualism. They say nowhere they support parents implanting their kids, but are very clear on the use of sign language.

NAD on CI and ASL:
"It is important to recognize that a newly implanted child is unable to understand spoken language through listening alone. Therefore parents and professionals should continue to use sign language to ensure age-appropriate psychological, social, cognitive, and language development."

25 years out of school.. indeed.
Click to expand...

Thank you flip.:ty: That is exactly why I provided the other sections of the position statement.
 
Drew's Dad said:
I read it a bit differently than you and Rick. By saying the NAD "recognizes the rights of parents to make informed choices for their deaf and hard of hearing children", even though they may disagree with the choice to use cochlear implants and/or other devices, they understand that the parents have the absolute right to decide what to do.

Whether they actually support cochlear implants is quite different from them understanding that the parent(s) do have the right to make that decision.

In other words, I agree with Rick because the paper is indicating that the NAD agrees that parents have the right to choose an implant for their child, but I agree with flip that they are not at all truly "respecting" or "supporting" the implant decision.
Click to expand...

I understand the same as you do, NAD recognize parents choices on CI, though I am not sure where you have the idea that they not at all truly "respect" parents choices to do an implant. I feel that they want to give an impression they are welcoming those parents with respect. It's perhaps hard to say what excactly NAD think as they have their internal debates. What I can relate to, is the words they use on their homepage, "recognize" and "respect". The word "support" with CI does not exists.

It's like you said, a big difference between recognizing parents choices versus supporting their choices. Respecting choices and supporting them is two vast different things. I respect the right to smoke, but I do not support that choice.
 
Drew's Dad said:
I read it a bit differently than you and Rick. By saying the NAD "recognizes the rights of parents to make informed choices for their deaf and hard of hearing children", even though they may disagree with the choice to use cochlear implants and/or other devices, they understand that the parents have the absolute right to decide what to do.

Whether they actually support cochlear implants is quite different from them understanding that the parent(s) do have the right to make that decision.

In other words, I agree with Rick because the paper is indicating that the NAD agrees that parents have the right to choose an implant for their child, but I agree with flip that they are not at all truly "respecting" or "supporting" the implant decision.
Click to expand...

I agree that the NAD respects the right of parental decision either way: to implant or not to implant. The rest of the postion statement is dedicted to explanation of the fact that, beyond parental decision, they support bilingualism for deaf children, and full dissemination of all information, and the conditions under which they view that information as being disseminated.
 
jillio said:
Thank you flip.:ty: That is exactly why I provided the other sections of the position statement.
Click to expand...

Yes, I noticed that, but couldn't resist explaining your post in a very basic way to some needed people here :=)
 
flip said:
I understand the same as you do, NAD recognize parents choices on CI, though I am not sure where you have the idea that they not at all truly "respect" parents choices to do an implant. I feel that they want to give an impression they are welcoming those parents with respect. It's perhaps hard to say what excactly NAD think as they have their internal debates. What I can relate to, is the words they use on their homepage, "recognize" and "respect". The word "support" with CI does not exists.

It's like you said, a big difference between recognizing parents choices versus supporting their choices. Respecting choices and supporting them is two vast different things. I respect the right to smoke, but I do not support that choice.
Click to expand...

Exactly. That is where so many of the anti-ci accusations come from. The inability to separate the respect for choice from the support of specific methodology.
 
LadySekhmet said:
ARE YOU JOKING ME?! how many is "TON TON TON"? That's not even a number. You are looking at the NEGATIVES, not the positives. Besides, there are over 100,000 CI users...how many do you really think have problems? I would say maybe 2%...that's about 200 people. It may seem a lot, but what about the other 98%?! (I really wish I can find data on this...I'll do the research and get back to you. :roll:)

Think about it...think it like a computer...20 years ago, computers were chunky, heavy, PIA, SLOW (heck, my first computer was 75 mhz!! :eek3:). Now, 20 years later - fast, easy, light...SAME analogy to CI!! I can BET you that some of those people who have problems may have one of the following:

1 - Not training...if there's lack of training, there will be issues
2 - HIGH expectations. A few expect to hear on first day..that's not the case
3 - MANY of these people's EARS have never been simulated to sound, hence why it hurts! If I don't wear my hearing aid for a month, then I put it on, it will be very loud and hurt...then after a few days, it will be fine. Same thing for CI. The nerves are like, "WTF?!" at first, then gradually becomes, "More Power! More sound!!"
4 - BAD surgery, misplacement of implant (many were new at doing this type of surgery, and nowadays better pain management, better instruments, technology etc)
5 - Audiologists suck at Mapping
6 - Older implant (maybe in small amount of people?)


Is ALL of them forced by parents? NO. Parents did not have a LOT of information available back then because it was a fairly new technology. CI is NOT for everyone.

Why won't *YOU* do the research? I *know* there's some people that do have issues with their CI, and I do feel bad for them, but I don't judge them.
I know what it is like to have a CI, you don't. You're judging your opinion based on other people's. I respect your opinion that you're against CI in children and maybe adults, but it seems to me that you're looking at the negatives, not the positives. Just don't disrespect OUR decision for getting the implants or parents' implanting their child. That's what America is great for...all about freedom of choices.

Does that mean if I approach you, and I start signing to you and we become friends...after a while, I tell you I have CI, will you not be my friend just because I have CI? That's discrimination, and that's sad you won't be my friend. :-(
Click to expand...


Did I say crititize on Adult got cochlear implant.. ?? Nope
As for my concern about "YOUNG CHILDREN" got implanted... which parent pressure their child have cochlear implant.. "fix" solution! That key.. Parent cannot accept their Deaf Child.

That is it..
I have nothing against whoever have cochlear implanted by Teenagers or Adult.. Isn't my business.. their making choice.. BUT.. My concern about "YOUNG CHILDREN, BABY, AND TODDLERS" So then let it be you have to understand my really concern about their so young have implanted which no speak their own rights.. Parent have rights force their child have cochlear implanted. *sigh* you jumpy!

Likely Yes, Fact Tons of ex-ci who aren't happy.. I wasn't even saying how many.. Did I say exact number? Why you're bring it up ego speak LOUD OF MOUTH? So pointless.. Why can't you accept pro and con..?? Aren't you ?
you prefer seek PRO.. than con side of their speak out voices who ex ci..

Are you willing talk with ex-ci'ers ? You have to learn and accept understand their feelings..

Seems you not willing listen feedback?

Excuse me..
 
LadySekhmet said:
Read Jillo's post...it did mention CI in there.

Plus - I know you support NAD...how many members do you think have CI? How many board members do you think have CI? How many pageant contestants do you think have CI? Plus, if you support NAD, that means you support their positions about CI.

CI is just a tool, a technology, a device. That's all there is to it.
Click to expand...

Whatever you say it..

:ugh3:

All you want blabbering postive things.. instead talk about negitive sides..
You hoping everything PERFECT..
not even think about other side effects..
Wow technology ci is best device..
Yeah Right.. fine by me then.. whatever you say it..

*ahem*
:ugh3:
 
Cloggy said:
WOW... YOU are deciding that.???.... what happened to "letting the child decided"?

Still, if your deaf baby can hear with CI, why would you want your baby not to hear?
Click to expand...

Exacty you feel that way point direct finger at me..
I knew you could say that! (initiated voice: Judge Dredd)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top