Why Would You NOT Choose A CI?

[neecy]

the powerpoint is geared towards a classroom (it was part of my course on educational technologies), and I'm not sure how to attach the powerpoint. However, I can give you the link to the FAQ on the FDA website. US FDA/CDRH: Cochlear Implants - Benefits and Risks of Cochlear Implants

Scroll through it, the risks are quite extensive. Not only an increased risk for menegitis (not sure how to spell that), but also for nerve damage not only in the face (partial paralysis) but also damage to the nerves in the tongue, which will alter how foods taste. This is all on the site.

If it's any consolation, the meningitis risk was because people weren't getting vaccinated prior to surgery. I don't believe the risk is there now because vaccinations are standard policy as far as I know. I had to get mine before my implant. I experienced numbness in my ear, and partial loss of my sense of taste on the "implanted" side of my tongue. Feeling came back, and so did my sense of taste after about 3 months. I've heard similar accounts from others here. This is addressing the risk from surgery itself, and they don't even address anesthesia which some people DO react to, and which I have seen used here as one of the major reasons somebody won't get a CI.

In the "other risks" - there are things listed there that I don't even consider to be a "risk" at all - like having to buy batteries, losing residual hearing (the residual hearing one has is not enough of a benefit in the first place, hence the reason to get a CI,) not being able to upgrade (ask the 3G CI users who are upgrading/have upgraded to Freedom,) or static electricity - it can wipe out the map on your processor but it won't "short circuit" your implant. Maps can be replaced. These are just a few- there are many things listed there that come across as being overly paranoid.

 

[Cloggy]

the powerpoint is geared towards a classroom (it was part of my course on educational technologies), and I'm not sure how to attach the powerpoint. However, I can give you the link to the FAQ on the FDA website. US FDA/CDRH: Cochlear Implants - Benefits and Risks of Cochlear Implants

Scroll through it, the risks are quite extensive. Not only an increased risk for menegitis (not sure how to spell that), but also for nerve damage not only in the face (partial paralysis) but also damage to the nerves in the tongue, which will alter how foods taste. This is all on the site.

Dragon Yoga,

Those risks.... how big are they:
Compared to dying in an airplane-crash - are they bigger?
Compared to getting hit by a drunk driver - are they bigger?
Compared to slipping in the bathtub and falling on your hear - are they bigger?
Compared to dying due to blood-poisoning in a dentists chair?

You read about risks and you nake a decision on the fact that there are risks without finding out how big they are.

You have no problem getting into a car...
You have no problem doing other things that have bigger risks compared to a CI-operation..
The risks should not be a reason for a decision regarding CI... There are plenty of other reasons, but risk is not one of them...

 

[DragonYoga]

The risks are still there and there is the risk of the nerve damage being permanent. I choose not to get a CI for that reason and also because for someone with my type of hearing loss, it just won't be more than a glorified hearing aid. No thanks. My digital hearing aids are wonderful and I prefer them.
Considering my medical history of managing to pick up rare conditions (I was born with Ectodermal Dysplasia, then developed Parasdoxymal Dystonia when I was 17), I'd probably have all of that damage happen, with my luck.


Copied/pasted from Cloggy:

Compared to dying in an airplane-crash - are they bigger?
Compared to getting hit by a drunk driver - are they bigger?
Compared to slipping in the bathtub and falling on your hear - are they bigger?
Compared to dying due to blood-poisoning in a dentists chair?

You read about risks and you nake a decision on the fact that there are risks without finding out how big they are.

You have no problem getting into a car...
You have no problem doing other things that have bigger risks compared to a CI-operation..
The risks should not be a reason for a decision regarding CI... There are plenty of other reasons, but risk is not one of them...


What are the statistics for each of the risks you list compared to the risks of the operation? I'm just curious. I've had surgery before, so I'm already well aware of the risks of just going under the knife.

The bathtub one was a big risk for me growing up due to seizures; I had to keep the door open so my mother could come in in case that happened. I'm also legally blind in my right eye, so the car is a huge risk for me every time I get in to drive. I've gotten into car accidents before, and I place the blame partly on my blind eye. So, using my own personal experience, I'd say the risks for the CI is a bigger risk for me.

BUT... regardless of the "small risks", I still would not allow my child to have the CI at a young age. IF the child wants one, fine. That decision is his/her own, NOT mine. That's my stance.

I don't believe parents should make the choice for their children, I believe it should be the children themselves to make that choice. The operation's being done on THEM, it's THEIR bodies - they should be the ones to make the choice.

And one other reason why parents should not make the choice: Are they making the choice for the RIGHT reasons? The right reasons being to help their child hear better, etc. The wrong reason (and there is one).... Is to make their child's deafness magically go away. That's setting the parents up for disappointment.

I have so many friends who got CIs at a young age, that they just refuse to wear anymore for whatever reason. It's a waste of money and a waste of time. That's why I say, let the child choose.

As for ME.... No thanks.

 

[Cloggy]

........... ............
I don't believe parents should make the choice for their children, I believe it should be the children themselves to make that choice. The operation's being done on THEM, it's THEIR bodies - they should be the ones to make the choice.

You have really no clue. It's a favorite idea that parents want CI for them self, but it's totally wrong.
Every parent wants the best for their child, and in general parents will go through a lot of effort to obtain that goal.
The choices might be different, but choice made is in the interest of the child.
The way you imply that raising a deaf child with CI, can be returned as well. Raising that same child without CI and without hearing could also be the choice of the parents. Not the child's.. And that again is not the case.

The parent acts on behalf of the child, in the interest of the child. No matter what decision is made. That's what parents are for.

And one other reason why parents should not make the choice: Are they making the choice for the RIGHT reasons? The right reasons being to help their child hear better, etc. The wrong reason (and there is one).... Is to make their child's deafness magically go away. That's setting the parents up for disappointment.

Perhaps the wrong reason the withhold a child CI is because the parent does not want the child to be different. The child needs to be as deaf as the parent!

Making a choice based on "the child should be like me" is wrong. Wrong when done by hearing parents AND by deaf parents..

I have so many friends who got CIs at a young age, that they just refuse to wear anymore for whatever reason. It's a waste of money and a waste of time. That's why I say, let the child choose.

As for ME.... No thanks.

First.... define "young age". What's that..? 10 years old?
You should invite them to AllDeaf. I would love to meet them.
My feeling is that you have not seen the children that are successful. They dissolve in the hearing world and are doing fine. You will not meet them, and possibly you will not be able to communicate with them..

And - about risks...
I guess you showed yourself that you are taking bigger risks during your daily routines that probably the risk of Ci-surgery...
I'm glad you showed that there are other reasons you do not choose for CI.

 

[jillio]

You have really no clue. It's a favorite idea that parents want CI for them self, but it's totally wrong.
Every parent wants the best for their child, and in general parents will go through a lot of effort to obtain that goal.
The choices might be different, but choice made is in the interest of the child.
The way you imply that raising a deaf child with CI, can be returned as well. Raising that same child without CI and without hearing could also be the choice of the parents. Not the child's.. And that again is not the case.

The parent acts on behalf of the child, in the interest of the child. No matter what decision is made. That's what parents are for.

Perhaps the wrong reason the withhold a child CI is because the parent does not want the child to be different. The child needs to be as deaf as the parent!

Making a choice based on "the child should be like me" is wrong. Wrong when done by hearing parents AND by deaf parents..


First.... define "young age". What's that..? 10 years old?
You should invite them to AllDeaf. I would love to meet them.My feeling is that you have not seen the children that are successful. They dissolve in the hearing world and are doing fine. You will not meet them, and possibly you will not be able to communicate with them..

And - about risks...
I guess you showed yourself that you are taking bigger risks during your daily routines that probably the risk of Ci-surgery...
I'm glad you showed that there are other reasons you do not choose for CI.

Look around cloggy. There are members of AD currently that have had CI and now choose not to use it.

They "dissolve" in the hearing world? Quite often that is exactly what happens. They live in that never never land of in between. Very, very sad, indeed.

And the topic is, Why would you not choose a CI, not why would you choose a Ci.

 

[lilylover72]

Look around cloggy. There are members of AD currently that have had CI and now choose not to use it.

They "dissolve" in the hearing world? Quite often that is exactly what happens. They live in that never never land of in between. Very, very sad, indeed.

And the topic is, Why would you not choose a CI, not why would you choose a Ci.

Yes i agree with you.

 

[Cloggy]

Look around cloggy. There are members of AD currently that have had CI and now choose not to use it.
..............
And the topic is, Why would you not choose a CI, not why would you choose a Ci.

Look around JT. There are people members of AD currently that have CI and choose to use it. And even more that are not members..

"And the topic is, Why would you not choose a CI, not why would you choose a Ci."
Not choosing CI is an excellent choice... when done for the right reason.
Would you want someone to choose Ci for the wrong reason..?

Have you applied for moderator already..?? Or just practicing ..?

 

[jillio]

Look around JT. There are people members of AD currently that have CI and choose to use it. And even more that are not members..

"And the topic is, Why would you not choose a CI, not why would you choose a Ci."
Not choosing CI is an excellent choice... when done for the right reason.
Would you want someone to choose Ci for the wrong reason..?

Have you applied for moderator already..?? Or just practicing ..?

That was not the question, cloggy. You asked where the dissatisfied people were. I provided an answer.

In answer to your second question, it is done all the time.

 

[DragonYoga]

Cloggy, in answer to your question on when my friends got CI... when they were 1, 2 years old.

And you're assuming a lot about me. I happen to be a deaf education major, and I learned more about CI in college than I did out of it.

And like Jillio said, this is the "why you would NOT choose CI"... so do me a favor and quit trying to push your beliefs on me. I have my own opinions and I provided the answers for my reasons.

As for the parents' decisions, I stand by what I said. So many of my friends have told me stories of how disappointed their parents were that CI didn't solve the "deafness problem".

Any further posts made by you to degrade me or to insult my intelliegence, I will not answer.

 

[shel90]

Cloggy, in answer to your question on when my friends got CI... when they were 1, 2 years old.

And you're assuming a lot about me. I happen to be a deaf education major, and I learned more about CI in college than I did out of it.

And like Jillio said, this is the "why you would NOT choose CI"... so do me a favor and quit trying to push your beliefs on me. I have my own opinions and I provided the answers for my reasons.

As for the parents' decisions, I stand by what I said. So many of my friends have told me stories of how disappointed their parents were that CI didn't solve the "deafness problem".

Any further posts made by you to degrade me or to insult my intelliegence, I will not answer.

I am a deaf ed teacher and I see so many children who dont benefit from their CIs enough to rely on spoken language only. When u become a teacher, u will be sick to your stomach by how many deaf children end up so language delayed cuz their parents believed that the CI will make them hearing. I have been teaching for 5 years and even now, we are still getting an influx of older children with CIs who fell so far behind with language and academic cuz they werent exposed to sign language due to their parents putting all their faith in the AVT approach.

I am not against them and I support the idea of giving every child the opportunity to develop oral skills but what I am against is the removal of a visual language to these children for fear that they would not be able to develop oral skills.

 

[DragonYoga]

I am a deaf ed teacher and I see so many children who dont benefit from their CIs enough to rely on spoken language only. When u become a teacher, u will be sick to your stomach by how many deaf children end up so language delayed cuz their parents believed that the CI will make them hearing. I have been teaching for 5 years and even now, we are still getting an influx of older children with CIs who fell so far behind with language and academic cuz they werent exposed to sign language due to their parents putting all their faith in the AVT approach.

I am not against them and I support the idea of giving every child the opportunity to develop oral skills but what I am against is the removal of a visual language to these children for fear that they would not be able to develop oral skills.

THANK YOU!!!

 

[shel90]

You have really no clue. It's a favorite idea that parents want CI for them self, but it's totally wrong.
Every parent wants the best for their child, and in general parents will go through a lot of effort to obtain that goal.
The choices might be different, but choice made is in the interest of the child.
The way you imply that raising a deaf child with CI, can be returned as well. Raising that same child without CI and without hearing could also be the choice of the parents. Not the child's.. And that again is not the case.

The parent acts on behalf of the child, in the interest of the child. No matter what decision is made. That's what parents are for.

Perhaps the wrong reason the withhold a child CI is because the parent does not want the child to be different. The child needs to be as deaf as the parent!

Making a choice based on "the child should be like me" is wrong. Wrong when done by hearing parents AND by deaf parents..


First.... define "young age". What's that..? 10 years old?
You should invite them to AllDeaf. I would love to meet them.
My feeling is that you have not seen the children that are successful.[/B] They dissolve in the hearing world and are doing fine. You will not meet them, and possibly you will not be able to communicate with them..

And - about risks...
I guess you showed yourself that you are taking bigger risks during your daily routines that probably the risk of Ci-surgery...
I'm glad you showed that there are other reasons you do not choose for CI.

As usual, u are on your high horse and feel the need to insult a deaf poster who doesnt believe in the same things as you do.

This statement bolded in red shows that u are implying that deaf people who rely on sign language are not successful. U just have insulted so many people here.

This person explained that he/she has a condition that puts him/her at a high risk for something happening during the surgery. Why insult that?

 

[shel90]

THANK YOU!!!

U are welcome.

 

[DragonYoga]

This statement bolded in red shows that u are implying that deaf people who rely on sign language are not successful. U just have insulted so many people here.

Gotta add. I'm a native signer, AND a good speaker to the point I have unintentionally fooled hearing people into thinking I could hear. I'm a graduate from a deaf school, and I am totally mainstreamed at a private college, with no need for any remedial help - unlike so many HEARING students that have had to take classes to improve their reading/literacy skills. When they tested me at age 12, my reading skills were so far off the chart they couldn't measure it.

Am I successful, even as a native signer? Yes. Married, living on my own, bills on my own, friends... Nothing different from a hearing person, except I can't hear.

 

[shel90]

This statement bolded in red shows that u are implying that deaf people who rely on sign language are not successful. U just have insulted so many people here.

Gotta add. I'm a native signer, AND a good speaker to the point I have unintentionally fooled hearing people into thinking I could hear. I'm a graduate from a deaf school, and I am totally mainstreamed at a private college, with no need for any remedial help - unlike so many HEARING students that have had to take classes to improve their reading/literacy skills. When they tested me at age 12, my reading skills were so far off the chart they couldn't measure it.

Am I successful, even as a native signer? Yes. Married, living on my own, bills on my own, friends... Nothing different from a hearing person, except I can't hear.[/QUOT

I know so many Deaf people like you and it makes me sick when I read blogs or posts about how oral deaf people are considered as the successful ones just simply because they have good oral skills. :roll:

 

[rick48]

You have really no clue. It's a favorite idea that parents want CI for them self, but it's totally wrong.
Every parent wants the best for their child, and in general parents will go through a lot of effort to obtain that goal.
The choices might be different, but choice made is in the interest of the child.
The way you imply that raising a deaf child with CI, can be returned as well. Raising that same child without CI and without hearing could also be the choice of the parents. Not the child's.. And that again is not the case.

The parent acts on behalf of the child, in the interest of the child. No matter what decision is made. That's what parents are for.

Perhaps the wrong reason the withhold a child CI is because the parent does not want the child to be different. The child needs to be as deaf as the parent!

Making a choice based on "the child should be like me" is wrong. Wrong when done by hearing parents AND by deaf parents..


First.... define "young age". What's that..? 10 years old?
You should invite them to AllDeaf. I would love to meet them.
My feeling is that you have not seen the children that are successful. They dissolve in the hearing world and are doing fine. You will not meet them, and possibly you will not be able to communicate with them..

And - about risks...
I guess you showed yourself that you are taking bigger risks during your daily routines that probably the risk of Ci-surgery...
I'm glad you showed that there are other reasons you do not choose for CI.

So right Cloggy, just totally clueless but did you really expect much from someone who thinks infants should be making decisions and not parents?

 

[DragonYoga]

So right Cloggy, just totally clueless but did you really expect much from someone who thinks infants should be making decisions and not parents?

Did I say infants? I should explain. When the child is OLD ENOUGH to make that decision for themselves - then they should. Not the parents. I should have clarified that before, sorry. Old enough in my opinion is from 10 years on, when they know enough and have experienced enough to make the decision themselves.

Parents DO want the best for their child and I'm not arguing that. COME ON! This is a thread on why we don't want CI... like the OP said, this should be a free thread for people to explain their reasons. I'm not allowed?

 

[jillio]

I am a deaf ed teacher and I see so many children who dont benefit from their CIs enough to rely on spoken language only. When u become a teacher, u will be sick to your stomach by how many deaf children end up so language delayed cuz their parents believed that the CI will make them hearing. I have been teaching for 5 years and even now, we are still getting an influx of older children with CIs who fell so far behind with language and academic cuz they werent exposed to sign language due to their parents putting all their faith in the AVT approach.

I am not against them and I support the idea of giving every child the opportunity to develop oral skills but what I am against is the removal of a visual language to these children for fear that they would not be able to develop oral skills.[/QUOTE]

As am I. Unfortunately, that is itnerpreted to be "anti-CI" from some of the more extremists on the forum. Isn't it ironic that they are hearing?

 

[Jolie77]

Mod's Note -

This thread is mainly about "Why you would not choose a CI". It is not "Why would you choose a CI".

I have seen a lot of flaming/provoking handing around in this thread lately. Understandably, there's a lot of opinions geared which is fine. Each and every person is entitled to it's own opinions but it does not mean that we have to encounter with enticing each other in a direction. With due respect, If you guys don't have anything nice to say, please refrain yourself from doing such thing.

I am going to give this thread a chance to start anew. If not, This is going to be the FINAL warning for everyone who participates in this thread - The thread will be closed with no questions asked.

 

[jillio]

This statement bolded in red shows that u are implying that deaf people who rely on sign language are not successful. U just have insulted so many people here.

Gotta add. I'm a native signer, AND a good speaker to the point I have unintentionally fooled hearing people into thinking I could hear. I'm a graduate from a deaf school, and I am totally mainstreamed at a private college, with no need for any remedial help - unlike so many HEARING students that have had to take classes to improve their reading/literacy skills. When they tested me at age 12, my reading skills were so far off the chart they couldn't measure it.

Am I successful, even as a native signer? Yes. Married, living on my own, bills on my own, friends... Nothing different from a hearing person, except I can't hear.

You, and the numerous deaf indviduals like you are the successes that are ignored by the oralists. Why would you, and the other individuals like you choose not to have a CI? Because it is not necessary to achieve a higher quality of life than you are capable of achieving without a CI.