If you're deciding on a CI or decided not to get one

Hohtopics said:
For me, it was not so much the accessibility issue but rather a person's. Thinking it's easier to change oneself rather than trying to change others. To each his or her own.
Click to expand...

Cowpath much?
 
How I look at it is this. If an HA will give them the ability to hear as well as they can or want to. Then that's the way to go. If their hearing has dropped below the ability for hearing aids to help. Then they should, if they want to be able to hear, look into the CI.

On a side note. In my mind if someone can use technology to hear but makes a conscious decision not to use it. I respect that
Click to expand...
Oh yeah, it's awesome for folks who've maxed out on traditional aids or progressive losses.
 
I hate audist views...

they suck!
 
deafskeptic said:
Uh..uh that bugs me big time. :mad:
Click to expand...

Yes me too, especially when we address the superiority-prejudicial attitude yet they twist it to appear we are advocating against technology or education; or that we are closed and interverted and it is all about sign language and nothing else.

Sign language is vitally important, but that is not everything we are about. Their attitude is that because we can't hear, they perceive us as less capable, less intelligient and that we cannot pertain to the highest intellectual and educational levels because we don't have 'perfect hearing', thus pushing the assistive technology for the wrong reasons.

The HAs and CIs are assistive apparatus and nothing more. One can obtain the same ends for quality of life, with or without them.
 
BecLak said:
Yes me too, especially when we address the superiority-prejudicial attitude yet they twist it to appear we are advocating against technology or education; or that we are closed and interverted and it is all about sign language and nothing else.

Sign language is vitally important, but that is not everything we are about. Their attitude is that because we can't hear, they perceive us as less capable, less intelligient and that we cannot pertain to the highest intellectual and educational levels because we don't have 'perfect hearing', thus pushing the assistive technology for the wrong reasons.

The HAs and CIs are assistive apparatus and nothing more. One can obtain the same ends for quality of life, with or without them.
Click to expand...
Exactly. I can now listen to music and other things without the awful ringing in my ears but to the hearing I'm still deaf and I still need captions though I can make out a lot of words. I couldn't make out any words before I got CI.

As for my life, it's pretty much the same that it was. Quality of life has to do with your mindset, imho.
 
deafskeptic said:
Exactly. I can now listen to music and other things without the awful ringing in my ears but to the hearing I'm still deaf and I still need captions though I can make out a lot of words. I couldn't make out any words before I got CI.

As for my life, it's pretty much the same that it was. Quality of life has to do with your mindset, imho.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Quality of life is more often an internal situation. External fixes don't work. Excepting of course, things like terminal illness with intractable pain and situation similar.
 
BecLak said:
Yes me too, especially when we address the superiority-prejudicial attitude yet they twist it to appear we are advocating against technology or education; or that we are closed and interverted and it is all about sign language and nothing else.

Sign language is vitally important, but that is not everything we are about. Their attitude is that because we can't hear, they perceive us as less capable, less intelligient and that we cannot pertain to the highest intellectual and educational levels because we don't have 'perfect hearing', thus pushing the assistive technology for the wrong reasons.

The HAs and CIs are assistive apparatus and nothing more. One can obtain the same ends for quality of life, with or without them.
Click to expand...

Yep, thats annoys me when they try pin it on us being the annoying ones and we know nothing about CI and aids. They don't think about both sides, only their side. We think about both sides and try balance it out.
 
BecLak said:
The HAs and CIs are assistive apparatus and nothing more. One can obtain the same ends for quality of life, with or without them.
Click to expand...

I disagree with this statement, first, to a large extent, quality of life (QOL) is subjective and personal, what you may view as essential to improve your QOL maybe something that someone else does not view as having any impact on their QOL.

HAs and Cis are examples as there exist some deaf who do not view either or both as having any impact on their QOL and others who do so, there are many examples of this just on this board alone. It does not make one's view and/or decision right or wrong nor does the view held by one detract and/or add to someone else's view, it just is what it is: differing views on the same subject.

As for the second part of your statement, that however is factually incorrect first for many they will not have the same access to sounds if they do not utilize a HA or a CI. Again, there are many examples of posters who have CIs and who have stated that they can hear sounds with them that they could not with HAs and obviously, if they were unaided. Thus, it was physically not possible for them to do so without access to HAs or Cis. Second, if a person views access to sounds as important to improving their QOL then having HAs and/or CIs as opposed to not having them will have a direct impact on their QOL.
Rick
 
rick48 said:
I disagree with this statement, first, to a large extent, quality of life (QOL) is subjective and personal, what you may view as essential to improve your QOL maybe something that someone else does not view as having any impact on their QOL.

HAs and Cis are examples as there exist some deaf who do not view either or both as having any impact on their QOL and others who do so, there are many examples of this just on this board alone. It does not make one's view and/or decision right or wrong nor does the view held by one detract and/or add to someone else's view, it just is what it is: differing views on the same subject.

As for the second part of your statement, that however is factually incorrect first for many they will not have the same access to sounds if they do not utilize a HA or a CI. Again, there are many examples of posters who have CIs and who have stated that they can hear sounds with them that they could not with HAs and obviously, if they were unaided. Thus, it was physically not possible for them to do so without access to HAs or Cis. Second, if a person views access to sounds as important to improving their QOL then having HAs and/or CIs as opposed to not having them will have a direct impact on their QOL.
Rick
Click to expand...

Only an audist would say the bolded. Only a freaking audist woulds say that quality of life is impossible to achieve without sounds. I do not know what else to say except that you are like a broken record.
 
if a person views access to sounds as important to improving their QOL then having HAs and/or CIs as opposed to not having them will have a direct impact on their QOL.
Click to expand...
Did you miss this part of his post.
Quality of life is SUBJECTIVE and, IF a person "values" sound, then having assistive technology will improve THEIR quality of life.

Some people believe having an expensive car improves their QOL while others are just as happy to have a car that gets them from point A to point B.

QOL is personal and NOONE should tell another what will or will not improve their QOL.
 
LoveBlue said:
Did you miss this part of his post.
Quality of life is SUBJECTIVE and, IF a person "values" sound, then having assistive technology will improve THEIR quality of life.

Some people believe having an expensive car improves their QOL while others are just as happy to have a car that gets them from point A to point B.

QOL is personal and NOONE should tell another what will or will not improve their QOL.
Click to expand...


Thanks for pointing it out.
Rick
 
Beowulf said:
Only an audist would say the bolded. Only a freaking audist woulds say that quality of life is impossible to achieve without sounds. I do not know what else to say except that you are like a broken record.
Click to expand...

Under different circumstances I would respond to you but in reality, you are just not worth any further of my time.
Rick
 
LoveBlue said:
Did you miss this part of his post.
Quality of life is SUBJECTIVE and, IF a person "values" sound, then having assistive technology will improve THEIR quality of life.

Some people believe having an expensive car improves their QOL while others are just as happy to have a car that gets them from point A to point B.

QOL is personal and NOONE should tell another what will or will not improve their QOL.
Click to expand...

Subjectivity is internalized, not externalized. No amount of assistive technology will work if there is no desire for their benefits. The desire comes from the immediate reality of one's life and the necessity of making adjustments. All too often, no adjustment is necessary except within.
 
rick48 said:
Under different circumstances I would respond to you but in reality, you are just not worth any further of my time.
Rick
Click to expand...

*Flashing you a peace symbol*





Well, half of it, anyway. :P
 
Beowulf said:
Only an audist would say the bolded. Only a freaking audist woulds say that quality of life is impossible to achieve without sounds. I do not know what else to say except that you are like a broken record.
Click to expand...

Exactly. All that post was saying was the same old thing. Quality of life with sound is superior to quality of life without sound.
 
Back
Top