Let Them Hear Foundation

[jillio]

Sounds to me you are blaming them for making a profit. And you don't even know how much profit is being made.
For an organisation to help people as good as they can, there's no need in my opinion to show a financial overview, and if good-looking offices, good salaries etc mean that more people will donate, so more people can be helped, that's absolutely OK for me.

You are just looking for ways to discredit an organisation that is actually helping.

See the addition to the post you are responding to. I am not blaming anyone for anything, nor am I making a judgement on on aything other than the article's altruistic tone. I am simply pointing out what is. And perhaps you don't see the need for a financial overview, the government does.

If you want to take on an organisation that is doing everything it can for financial reasons, have a look at the USA government!
They are definitely not in the business to help the American People....
How much are they spending on a war just to secure oil. How much money are they spending on education for the deaf. HOw much would 1 day or war help the deaf people of America?

I don't disagree with you regarding the American Goverment. And that is exactly why I have a moral and ethical distates for corporate American when they function under the same principles as the government. I find the rich getting richer off of the misfortune of a population of people to be objectionable.

And the big offices,e tc. that you speak of do nothing in the way of helping a population of people needing service. They make comfortable the corporate executives and their employees. Perhaps, if these organiztions decided to forego the expensive furnishings and CEO perks, and instead put that money into even mor programs that would benefit the deaf population....such as education and HA coverage, they would have more of an ethical leg to stand on and their altruism might actually hold credibility. That is not to say that no one has benefited. It is only to say that when a client benefits, the corporation benefits. Its a business, and without a profit, the organization will not exist. It's not like they all have other jobs and are doing this in their free time because it is the moral and ethical thing to do. And of course, that is the nature of the beast. But let's quit trying to pretend the elephant isn't standing in the living room when we all know it is.

 

[Cloggy]

............
And the big offices,e tc. that you speak of do nothing in the way of helping a population of people needing service. They make comfortable the corporate executives and their employees. Perhaps, if these organiztions decided to forego the expensive furnishings and CEO perks, and instead put that money into even mor programs that would benefit the deaf population....such as education and HA coverage, they would have more of an ethical leg to stand on and their altruism might actually hold credibility.

You are projecting "altruism" upon them. They never said that.
btw.. Who say's they have any money left to donate. Who say's they are not doing that?

............
That is not to say that no one has benefited. It is only to say that when a client benefits, the corporation benefits. Its a business, and without a profit, the organization will not exist. It's not like they all have other jobs and are doing this in their free time because it is the moral and ethical thing to do. And of course, that is the nature of the beast. But let's quit trying to pretend the elephant isn't standing in the living room when we all know it is.

You assume the elephant is there. The elephant might be there, and if it is, it is very welcome to stand there.

 

[jillio]

You are projecting "altruism" upon them. They never said that.
No, but the tone of the article, and they way the information was presented was an oabvious intent to get an emotional reaction from the reader in order that the reader simply accpet at face value what was said, as well as what was implied. An intenttional attempt to invoke a "Oh, isn't that wonderful of them; how generous they are!" reaction that precludes the reader q2uestioning and looking at the information with a critical eye. They want people to respond off the cuff without giving any thought to what they are responding to. It is to their benefit. I have already expalined how it is to their benefit.
btw.. Who say's they have any money left to donate. Who say's they are not doing that?
If they have no money left to donate, then chances are they are not making a profit. Given the number of ventures this organization is involved in, I would venture to say that there is sufficient monies to support any form of deaf advocacy. Restriction to the CI portion is simply a choice, not a neccessity.

The elephant is very welcome to stand there.

Yes, the elephant is very welcome to stand there, as long as we don't pretend he isn't there because it is more convienient than recognition.

BTW, the whole point of mentioning the elephant in the first place is to stimulate discussion that encourages critical thought and intelligent assessment of the facts. Obviously, mentioning the elephant has worked.

 

[jillio]

You are projecting "altruism" upon them. They never said that.
btw.. Who say's they have any money left to donate. Who say's they are not doing that?
You assume the elephant is there. The elephant might be there, and if it is, it is very welcome to stand there.

It is quite obvious that the elephant is there, cloggy. Ignoring it, or calling it a dog does not change the fact that it is there.

 

[flip]

I am very thankful for what let them hear did for me. They did allow me to make my choice for Cochlear Implants not based on my ability to pay but on my insurances company's responsibilities to pay.

I don't care about their gain, I received more gain than I can ever repay. they handled all the appeals for me free of charge. They treated me with respect and listened to me. I can never say a cross word about this organization, because there is not one to say.

I am glad they did help you feeling better. I am just puzzled that they do not mention sign language for early language, but instead presenting a receipt for depriving the children of language the first 6 months.

My question is why do they not mention ASL as an option for early language and less risk of language delay, but choose to only give speech and listening training? I hope they aren't that cruel that they do so because it's easier to sell implants with the oral philosophy, even if it deprives deaf children of language according to a growing portion of research?

 

[Cloggy]

It is quite obvious that the elephant is there, cloggy. Ignoring it, or calling it a dog does not change the fact that it is there.

No it is not.
You claim it's there. You have not shown anywhere how much profit is made. You assume it's an elephant, but based on what? Just because you dislike people choosing a CI?

You are always asking to prove you this, and to prove you that, but here, you just assume it's huge profits and no other thoughts that drive this organisation.

So, again, where do you base that thought on? Is it really an elephant, or is it just a cute soft little bird?.

 

[jillio]

I am glad they did help you feeling better. I am just puzzled that they do not mention sign language for early language, but instead presenting a receipt for depriving the children of language the first 6 months.

My question is why do they not mention ASL as an option for early language and less risk of language delay, but choose to only give speech and listening training? I hope they aren't that cruel that they do so because it's easier to sell implants with the oral philosophy, even if it deprives deaf children of language according to a growing portion of research?[/QUOTE

I believe the majority of us agree that a selling point of CI is the promise of oral language development. At least as presented to hearing parents of deaf chidlren. Which makes it even more important that all of the pertinent information is made available in order to give people the opportunity to assess the situation and the motivation from a realistic perspective.

 

[Cloggy]

..........
I believe the majority of us agree that a selling point of CI is the promise of oral language development. At least as presented to hearing parents of deaf chidlren. Which makes it even more important that all of the pertinent information is made available in order to give people the opportunity to assess the situation and the motivation from a realistic perspective.

oral language development = realistic perspective

 

[jillio]

oral language development = realistic perspective

Not for all, cloggy, not for all. And even those that are able to develp oral language skills, many still suffer delays that create difficulties for much of their life and impact their academic achievement, as well as their pshycosocial development. What is wrong with letting parents know that the perponderance of the research regarding deaf children with CIs indicates that the highest functioning are exposed to both sign language and spoken language? And promoting the concept that parents must begin the implant procedure as soon as they receive the diagnosis, rather than emphasizing language enrichment as soon as the dignosis is made simply preys on the confusion and lack of information the majority of hearing parents have at the time of diagnosis.

 

[Cloggy]

Not for all, cloggy, not for all. And even those that are able to develp oral language skills, many still suffer delays that create difficulties for much of their life and impact their academic achievement, as well as their pshycosocial development. What is wrong with letting parents know that the perponderance of the research regarding deaf children with CIs indicates that the highest functioning are exposed to both sign language and spoken language? And promoting the concept that parents must begin the implant procedure as soon as they receive the diagnosis, rather than emphasizing language enrichment as soon as the dignosis is made simply preys on the confusion and lack of information the majority of hearing parents have at the time of diagnosis.

"even those that are able to develp oral language skills" and what percentage would that be. Tell me Jillio, what percentage does NOT develop language skills?

"highest functioning are exposed to both sign language and spoken language"
so.... oral development would be a good thing...
oral language development does not exclude signlanguage

And "promoting the concept that parents must begin the implant procedure as soon as they receive the diagnosis" is a good thing. Actually, even before the diagnosis would be great, since you can always stop the procedure when it's not wanted.
Starting the procedure when you finally decided to go for CI would be waisting a lot of precious time. In the time that the procedure is running you can learn sign, cued speech, about the Deaf world and stop the procedure if wanted.

And anyway,
When the decision is to have the child grow up with sound, early implantation is a huge advantage.... so why not use that...

 

[vallee]

Fighting for people to get the CI, as you put it, is no doubt not where the profit comes in. Unless, of course they are patients of the clinic, at which time, fighting the insurance companies insures that the clinic is paid. But, if you will read my further posts, you find an more in-depth explanation of how it is all connected to financial profit.

And, yes, people that want help are being helped. But not as a result of altruism, as the implication was in the article. If there was not a profit to be made as the result of the help proffered, it certainly would not be made available. It's called advertising in the retail market. Example: a big toy store make a donation to a charitable organization that distributes toys to underpriviledged children at Christmas time. The store recieves a notice in the local news, everyone says. "Aww... aren't they generous?" But the reason they do it is because due to press about their donation, and people's reactions to such, the name of the store is now the first one that people think of when shopping for toys. So, a donation of $500.00 worth of toys results in retail sales based on that donation, of many thousands of dollars in profit from sales. Simple business principle, combined with a simple psychological phenomenon.

Let me see, They are in California, I am in Tennessee. My clinic is in Tennessee. I know my CI company made money and so what. The HA companies make money too. I have so much paperwork that LTH did on my behalf. All the hours they talked to me, e-mailed me, talked to my insurance company, and everything else. I have a YEAR of denials. I have at least 7 denials. Sheri or Chris e-mailed me weekly to keep me informed.

My lawyer for my employment discrimation case never talked to me unless he needed something. And the bills for that case were through the roof.

For anyone who has received a denial from insurance, you have three choices - forget the surgery or equipment, pay for it yourself, or appeal the decision. The cost involve for appealing the decision is high. I was able to have it done for free because that is what they do.

Again, Jillio you can point out all kinds of things. You can say anything you want, but I know the real people behind this foundation. The real people are caring, awesome people, who did a fantastic job for me.

 

[jillio]

"even those that are able to develp oral language skills" and what percentage would that be. Tell me Jillio, what percentage does NOT develop language skills?

"highest functioning are exposed to both sign language and spoken language"
so.... oral development would be a good thing...
oral language development does not exclude signlanguage

And "promoting the concept that parents must begin the implant procedure as soon as they receive the diagnosis" is a good thing. Actually, even before the diagnosis would be great, since you can always stop the procedure when it's not wanted.
Starting the procedure when you finally decided to go for CI would be waisting a lot of precious time. In the time that the procedure is running you can learn sign, cued speech, about the Deaf world and stop the procedure if wanted.

I knew this was coming, cloggy. So we'll start with this:

Abstract
The aim of the study was to explore patterns of communication between 22 children with cochlear
implants (CI) and their parents, teachers and peers in natural interactions over a 2-year period.
The children, between 2 and 5 years old when implanted, had used the implant between 1 and
3.5 years at the end of the study. Analyses of videorecorded interactions showed that meaningful oral
communication was more easily obtained in the home setting than in the preschool setting. Patterns in
of communication between parent–child, content and complexity of dialogues, quality of peer
interactions, communicative styles of adults, and the use of sign language in communication turned
out to be important factors when explaining the result of the CI on the individual child’s
development.The children with the best oral skills were also good signers.
Out of the 22 children, 10 receive their education in sign-language classes, mainly at the schools for the deaf. Eight children attend regular classes for hearing children supported by a personal assistant using sign language. When the data collection in the school study is terminated, the children will have used their implants for between 5 and 7.5 years. Thus, this study will give us more detailed information on the
development of individual children with cochlear implants from a longitudinal perspective.

Analyses of the video recorded interactions showed that the children who had developed most oral language also had a well developed sign language. These children seemed to have an awareness of the function of language in communication and they were used to understand and be understood at home as well as in the preschool setting. When misunderstandings occurred, either because the children had not perceived the spoken words, or that the parents or teachers had not understood, the children tried to make repairs. They asked for repetitions or for more information, or they changed their own way of communicating to facilitate for the partner to establish a well functioning dialogue. Sign language in itself, however, was no guarantee for the development of spoken language. But children who had an insufficient command of sign language or whose sign-language development was discontinued also had very little or no spoken language. In three cases, we observed children who had very little sign language to begin with but, as their sign language increased, they also developed more spoken language.

The children in this study developed differently with their implants. There were no clear patterns
registered regarding the effects of variables such as time for and cause of deafness, time with implant or
age of operation, on the children’s ability to perceive and produce spoken language after 2 years of study.
But the group of children in this study is small and heterogenous and the conclusions of the results
must be considered as tentative. Variables such as time for and cause of deafness, and time with
implant or age of operation, are often used as important predictors of a successful effect on
implant use (Miyamoto et al. 1993; Ganz et al. 1994; Walzman et al. 1994; 1995). But the results have not been unequivocal. According to Ganz et al. (1994), age when receiving the implant had a minor effect
on the result concerning the prelingually deaf children.

The results of the present study indicate the importance of using a somewhat broader perspective on children’s development when discussing predictors of a successful result of the implant in terms of improving communicative skills.

Preisler, A., et.al. (2002). Psychosocial follow-up study of deaf preschool children using cochlear implants. Childcare, Health, & Development. 28-5. 403-418.

 

[jillio]

Let me see, They are in California, I am in Tennessee. My clinic is in Tennessee. I know my CI company made money and so what. The HA companies make money too. I have so much paperwork that LTH did on my behalf. All the hours they talked to me, e-mailed me, talked to my insurance company, and everything else. I have a YEAR of denials. I have at least 7 denials. Sheri or Chris e-mailed me weekly to keep me informed.

My lawyer for my employment discrimation case never talked to me unless he needed something. And the bills for that case were through the roof.

For anyone who has received a denial from insurance, you have three choices - forget the surgery or equipment, pay for it yourself, or appeal the decision. The cost involve for appealing the decision is high. I was able to have it done for free because that is what they do.

Again, Jillio you can point out all kinds of things. You can say anything you want, but I know the real people behind this foundation. The real people are caring, awesome people, who did a fantastic job for me.

It sets precedence, vallee. And once precedence is set, it provides them with a foundation for their legal arguments.

And precedence insures easier decisions in their favor. And the more decisions in their favor, the more implants are done. The more implants that are done, the more doctors need to be trained in the procedures. Etc, etc, etc. All of their actions go right back to the same place.

What I don't understand is why you guys keep getting so defensive when facts are pointed out. Youexpect me to concede certain issues, which Ihave done. Yet you refuse to condede the facts that I have presented. Take the emotion out of your arguments.

 

[jillio]

No it is not.
You claim it's there. You have not shown anywhere how much profit is made. You assume it's an elephant, but based on what? Just because you dislike people choosing a CI?

You are always asking to prove you this, and to prove you that, but here, you just assume it's huge profits and no other thoughts that drive this organisation.

So, again, where do you base that thought on? Is it really an elephant, or is it just a cute soft little bird?.

Denying that it is there doesn't mean it isn't there, cloggy. The elephant of which we speak is the financial gain that is necessary for this company's survival, and the fact that that financial gain is dependent upon CI surgeries being performed. And it is based on information directly taken from the LTH website.

 

[shel90]

oral language development = realistic perspective

Yes it is but unfortunately, a majority of deaf children are unable to master it. Even if they do, they are more likely to have language delays. I guess for me, I want the unrealistic view...for all deaf children to develop a strong language foundation and higher levels of critical thinking skills. I guess I am just dreaming.

 

[jillio]

Yes it is but unfortunately, a majority of deaf children are unable to master it. Even if they do, they are more likely to have language delays. I guess for me, I want the unrealistic view...for all deaf children to develop a strong language foundation and higher levels of critical thinking skills. I guess I am just dreaming.

Actually, shel, if you will check the research I just posted in #32 in response to cloggy, you are the one that has the more realistic view.

 

[vallee]

It sets precedence, vallee. And once precedence is set, it provides them with a foundation for their legal arguments.

And precedence insures easier decisions in their favor. And the more decisions in their favor, the more implants are done. The more implants that are done, the more doctors need to be trained in the procedures. Etc, etc, etc. All of their actions go right back to the same place.

What I don't understand is why you guys keep getting so defensive when facts are pointed out. Youexpect me to concede certain issues, which Ihave done. Yet you refuse to condede the facts that I have presented. Take the emotion out of your arguments.

How can I not be emotional? How can you not just see what this foundation did for myself and many others. I pulled up an article that talked about the foundation and you ripe it to pieces. I know you don't agree with CIs, but I have the joy of having 2 CIs. I have my CIs because they handled my appeals. I know their names, I know their hearts, I know the true motivations in the legal department. That is what matters to me.

 

[jillio]

How can I not be emotional? How can you not just see what this foundation did for myself and many others. I pulled up an article that talked about the foundation and you ripe it to pieces. I know you don't agree with CIs, but I have the joy of having 2 CIs. I have my CIs because they handled my appeals. I know their names, I know their hearts, I know the true motivations in the legal department. That is what matters to me.

I have already stated in several posts in this thread that I believe that it is wonderful that this organization was able to help you, vallee. You seem to be ignoring that. That does not change anything I have posted regarding their financial incentive to providing that help.

The legal department still gets paid for the assistance they provide, and the assistance they provide sets precedence so that they may more easily achieve decisions favoring implant from courts.

How do you remove the emotion from an argument? Stick to the facts. The fact is, they helped you. And another fact is, it was not out of altruism, it was designed to increase the financial gain made from CIs, not simply from the goodness of their hearts.

If you are referring to the article in Deaf News, yes I did rip it apart. The tone of the article was offensive, and there were many innacuracies stated in that article. And if you will also check, I am not the only one that objected to the tone of the article.

 

[shel90]

What good is a HA going to do. When a HA doesn't help any more, THEN, CI is an option.
Your option, when a HA does not help to hear, is to live without sound.
That's not a option. An option would be to live without sound, or to live with sound

Have u personally experienced being deaf and wearing HAs? I rely on my HAs heavily when I am around hearing people. They work for me. Maybe they dont work for some but HAs are still working for a lot of people espeically people with mild hearing losses. Dont they have a right to get their HAs covered?

 

[shel90]

How can I not be emotional? How can you not just see what this foundation did for myself and many others. I pulled up an article that talked about the foundation and you ripe it to pieces. I know you don't agree with CIs, but I have the joy of having 2 CIs. I have my CIs because they handled my appeals. I know their names, I know their hearts, I know the true motivations in the legal department. That is what matters to me.

Would this foundation help me, as a HA user, get new HAs or digital HAs?