JennyPenny1014
New Member
- Joined
- May 22, 2011
- Messages
- 16
- Reaction score
- 0
Thanks Joey. =]
Ok, then you need to say "Joey said it" instead of posting as your own response.
Ok, then you need to say "Joey said it" instead of posting as your own response.
Hi! My 2 cents: I think the decision to get a CI is separate from the decision to pursue ASL. CIs are tools that provides access to sound and don't come programmed with language. They are not mutually exclusive, either /or situations. Many, many children with CIs also use sign language, it's just that most use spoken language as their primary language because it is easier for them to acquire in everyday life ( most don't have access to an ASL-immersive environment in which to learn, as they do for spoken languages) and the populations in which they live most often use spoken languages.
You can put the question into more parallel terms and ask if learning English or any other spoken language would make ASL obsolete. I think that's like asking if learning German would make learning French obsolete. My answer would be the same: No. Languages provides the ability to communicate with different populations. Deciding which to learn could factor in such things as which is more accessible in your day to day, and which population would you want to interact with. The more languages you acquire, the wider your reach. But choosing one language isnt a statement against another. Not knowing Japanese doesn't make me an inferior person to someone who does, nor does it mean that I dismiss Japanese culture.
My child is profoundly deaf, she's firmly entrenched in Deaf culture, is at a school for the deaf, wears CIs, and is age-appropriately fluent in both ASL and Spoken English.
When the odds are less than 1 person a year, compared to the hundreds of thousands who are implanted, I would say electrocution isn't an issue.
Can't wait till Grendel gets in here and reads this foolishness.
I'm trying to find out if parents of implanted babies are more likely to push their children around in metal strollers outside during rainstorms than parents of unaided babies. That might raise the odds of electrocution for CI babies.
Sadly, no one seems to have conducted (heh) such a study.
On that bolded, I am very fluent in English . (Shel said so) But I can't be understood by most people if I try to speak it.'
'
So your daughter's situation is not the norm for the majority of deaf people.
I just got an app that is going to speak what I type for waitress, etc. But it would be pretty cumbersome for major interactions.
Except that my daughter's fluency with written English sucks, sadly. in terms of literacy, she reads and writes like a 5 year old.
Oh, wait ...
( what's that app? )
First of all, thank you :]
-Second.
That's still wrong because These young kids doesn't get a chance to make a choice to get CI or not. Rise kid first then tell them about CI and listen to their choice. And beside it child's body, not our.
Don't forget about hearing aids too. it really sad.
What if the kid has absolutly no response to hearing aids? I've got a mixed opinon on this. I DO think if a baby gets NO benifit from HA, that they should get implanted. But if it's ambigious they should wait. It really is too hard to tell how well a baby can benifit from HAs...like how many words they can understand etc. Yes, the audis affliated with CID can do it, but how can a audi from a regular Children's do it?It's not right for hearing people to force deaf children to get CI. I understand younger kids have more time to learn all sounds but I don't care. I think it is wrong. Even it is VERY wrong for hearing people to force their deaf children to learn ORAL only! They make me so These kind of people don't care about our deaf culture and deaf pride. I met three deaf boys from middle school, they were vitising my school. They all wore hearing aids and suck part is they don't know any ASL! I wanna smack their parents for allow that.
What if the kid has absolutly no response to hearing aids? I've got a mixed opinon on this. I DO think if a baby gets NO benifit from HA, that they should get implanted. But if it's ambigious they should wait. It really is too hard to tell how well a baby can benifit from HAs...like how many words they can understand etc. Yes, the audis affliated with CID can do it, but how can a audi from a regular Children's do it?
I agree....that sucks that a lot of kids don't know ASL.....but I do think that if Deaf Schools and camps and AG Bell pushed " Hey, look! You can learn ASL as a second language!" you'd have a ton ....and I mean a ton of kids picking it up as a second language.
I did say that. I said greater risk is getting a eletriced
Well if you wait longer, it may result "no as great" hearing, and speaking fluidity. This is how i think of it, if the baby cant hear with hearing aids, then I'd just implant them. Because eventually, 5-8 years later, as they learn about their deafness and implants, they can choose if they want to stick with an implant or not. After all, I'll be happy with whatever they want, knowing I gave the kid two choices without wasting the value first 5 years of learning enlgish...
*to many to are gonna agrue with my post, this is MY OPINION based on life
Tell me how can Katie Engle can choose to stick with an implant or not when she is six feet underground???