CI's for under 1 ???

Kateweb

New Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2005
Messages
697
Reaction score
0
Benefit planned for deaf child
NICOLE WEIS, Staff Writer
09/23/2006
Daily Nonpareil - Benefit planned for deaf child

Staff photo/Nicole Weis - Emilee Hansen, 22, holds her 9-month-old daughter, Kynnedi, who was born with a profound hearing disability. A benefit to raise money for Kynnedi to get two cochlear implants is being held at the Eagles Club in Glenwood today.
GLENWOOD - If it weren't for the pink miniature hearing aids tucked behind 9-month-old Kynnedi Anderson's ears, no one would ever know she was born deaf.

The happy baby girl babbles and coos just as most young toddlers do, but the difference is, Kynnedi can't hear herself. Her world is silent.

Doctors diagnosed Kynnedi with severe to profound bilateral hearing loss shortly after she was born Dec. 6, 2005. Her mother, Emilee Hansen, and her father, Jake Anderson, both of Glenwood, were devastated.

"The hard thing was that we didn't have an explanation why," recalled Hansen. "We still don't know what caused it."

Kynnedi's parents wanted her to have every opportunity to hear the sounds around her, so they had their daughter fitted for hearing aids at 2-months-old. In August, the couple found out the hearing aids weren't helping their daughter.

"We thought we saw a response," Hansen said with disappointment.

Still eager for Kynnedi to have the chance to listen to her parents tell her how much they adore her, Hansen and Anderson sought other options. That's when they heard about cochlear implants.



Cochlear implants consist of a microphone and speech processor placed behind the ear along with a receiver placed under the skin behind the ear. The speech processor digitizes sound signals and sends them to a transmitter, which then sends the coded signals to the receiver. The receiver delivers the signals to electrodes that have been surgically inserted in the cochlea, stimulating the auditory nerve fibers, creating the ability to hear, a sense Hansen said many people take for granted.

According to Hansen, cochlear implants would "bring Kynnedi from a no sound world into a hearing world."

The catch is that each implant costs approximately $45,000 and insurance will only cover one, not including the expenses associated with surgery. While Hansen is aware Kynnedi could wait to have the surgery or just get one cochlear implant, she knows it would be best for her daughter to get two implants, as soon as possible.

"I didn't want to put her through surgery, but it's better to have it done when she's younger," said Hansen, a full-time accounting student. "When the insurance company said they would only cover one (cochlear implant), that didn't faze us. We said, 'We'll cover the other one.'"

Research shows that the earlier a pre-lingual profoundly deaf child gets a cochlear implant, the better the chance for fully developing hearing and speech is. If a child has no sound input by a certain time, the ability to form parts of speech is lost forever, Hansen said. The mother of two - Hansen also has a 4-year-old daughter named Kylyn - compares getting just one cochlear implant to hear to correcting just one eye in order to see.

"We want her to adjust to hearing with both ears at the same time," Hansen said. "They say from the research they've done that it works on some people and some it doesn't. I think she'll be able to hear pretty well."

With one cochlear implant, Kynnedi would be able to hear noises and voices somewhat clearly, but with two, she could possibly hear as well as someone without a hearing disability.

"Until the implants we really have a loss of communication," said Hansen. "She's missing out on the world; she's missing out on so much. It's hard to know she's at that age when she should be saying 'Da-Da.'"

But Hansen refuses to look at the glass as half-empty.

"It's kind of nice when (Kylyn) is yelling and (Kynnedi) still sleeps," she joked.

For now, the hearing aids remain attached to Kynnedi's ears, so she can get used to the feeling of cochlear implants. Hansen hopes her daughter will undergo the surgery before her first birthday. Though there are several risks associated with the six- to eight-hour procedure, Hansen said giving her daughter the chance to hear was something she couldn't pass up.

Asked how it will feel when her daughter hears her mother's voice for the first time, Hansen eyes filled up with tears. "I'll probably cry," she said.
 
I would so like to knock that woman upside the head why would you do that to a kid that freeking young !! sugary is bad enof as a kid , I would wait till she was old enof to deside for herself if she wanted CI's
 
CIs at an very early age can be very benefical for speech and language development, so I'm not going to pass a negative judgement on the parents' choice.
 
I would so like to knock that woman upside the head why would you do that to a kid that freeking young !! sugary is bad enof as a kid , I would wait till she was old enof to deside for herself if she wanted CI's
The "Waiting for her to decide" argument will deprive her of options.
Have a look at the DVD/Video Sound & Fury 2. There you'll meet 12-year old Heather who got CI at age 9, and in part 1 (and 2) you'll see 5-year old Shelby who got CI when she was 1. Shelby will speak near-naturally at age 5, Heather still has difficulties at age 12!!
The sooner the better.

I think it's a very wise decision. I would think that the parents have explored the possibilities, and the medical team gives the go-ahead.... so the child would be old/big enough to handle the operation without problems.

But the medical part is just that.... a small part. CI is 5% technology, 95% WORK!! Just like being deaf is a lot of work. What I mean is... it's NOT the easy way out for the parents.

This girl will be able to grow up with hardly any delay in speech. That's a wonderful gift. Going for bi-lateral CI is also something that is a big plus for the child since it will help her in noisy environments and in hearing where sounds come from.

As for .. The child is deaf, deaf culture, identity etc... It will grow up being comfortable with hearing AND deafness. It can explore deafness later on in life. Together with her parents... In the mean while... she get's to hear and learn to speak...
Excellent!
________________________________________________
holland.gif

Information about . . . . . my daughter . . . . . . how the ear works . . . . . . . CI-nonsense .
 
This girl will be able to grow up with hardly any delay in speech.
Cloggy that's NOT a sure thing! Yes, she may do better speechwise with CI, rather then with hearing aids, but with all things results have been VERY mixed. Some kids essentially graduate from speech therapy, but others only develop minmal spoken language skills. Most others develop in between those two extremes. But, most orally trained kids have to have speech all their lives.
 
Cloggy that's NOT a sure thing! Yes, she may do better speechwise with CI, rather then with hearing aids, but with all things results have been VERY mixed. Some kids essentially graduate from speech therapy, but others only develop minmal spoken language skills. Most others develop in between those two extremes. But, most orally trained kids have to have speech all their lives.

Citation, please.
 
I have throw 2 cents...

It's up to parent and what they doing with their children, if their children get screw up then blame on them, not for our problem.
 
The "Waiting for her to decide" argument will deprive her of options.
Have a look at the DVD/Video Sound & Fury 2. There you'll meet 12-year old Heather who got CI at age 9, and in part 1 (and 2) you'll see 5-year old Shelby who got CI when she was 1. Shelby will speak near-naturally at age 5, Heather still has difficulties at age 12!!
The sooner the better.

I think it's a very wise decision. I would think that the parents have explored the possibilities, and the medical team gives the go-ahead.... so the child would be old/big enough to handle the operation without problems.

But the medical part is just that.... a small part. CI is 5% technology, 95% WORK!! Just like being deaf is a lot of work. What I mean is... it's NOT the easy way out for the parents.

This girl will be able to grow up with hardly any delay in speech. That's a wonderful gift. Going for bi-lateral CI is also something that is a big plus for the child since it will help her in noisy environments and in hearing where sounds come from.

As for .. The child is deaf, deaf culture, identity etc... It will grow up being comfortable with hearing AND deafness. It can explore deafness later on in life. Together with her parents... In the mean while... she get's to hear and learn to speak...
Excellent!

Not always, My friend that who received CI when she was 19 years old and she already improve her oral language in one years but some children who made failed to learn how to use oral language after got CI when they are under 3 years old.
 
Cloggy that's NOT a sure thing! Yes, she may do better speechwise with CI, rather then with hearing aids, but with all things results have been VERY mixed. Some kids essentially graduate from speech therapy, but others only develop minmal spoken language skills. Most others develop in between those two extremes. But, most orally trained kids have to have speech all their lives.
Take children with the same capabilities, starting point etc. One with CI at 1 and 1 with CI at 9 years old and the 9-year old will not reach the same level as the 1-year old.. The brain isn't made for it.
Apart from seeing it around me, there have been studies about it showing clear benefit regarding early implantation.
I'll try to find the study and show the results here....
Wordrecognition.jpg
 
Last edited:
Not always, My friend that who received CI when she was 19 years old and she already improve her oral language in one years but some children who made failed to learn how to use oral language after got CI when they are under 3 years old.
There's a difference between the individual examples one can find and the way the majority develops.
I can find an example of a 40-year old woman that was deaf for 33 years, got a CI and spoke very well. This is wonderful BUT not standard.

In your case, the child below 3 that doesn't develop speech as well... they probably would have done even worse had they been implanted at age 19. I would expect that for them, they were lucky to be implanted at that age. And about your friend.. she would probably have excelled had she been implanted early....
She's doing great - that's fantastic..
 
Cloggy that's NOT a sure thing! Yes, she may do better speechwise with CI, rather then with hearing aids, but with all things results have been VERY mixed. Some kids essentially graduate from speech therapy, but others only develop minmal spoken language skills. Most others develop in between those two extremes. But, most orally trained kids have to have speech all their lives.

How would YOU know? You read a hell of a lot, but the literature is wrong, sometimes. Just because studies tell us the things they do, that doesn't always translate into reality. Ofc, there are failures. No one is saying there isn't, but you paint a very bleak picture for implanting children, and I wonder why; considering you don't have a CI, and you also aren't qualified to get one.

Deafdyke, I would strongly suggest that you stop reading crap that you find in magazines and online, and talk to people. You might find that there are more successes with the CI than you think.

Now, before you jump on ME because I'm hearing. You're absolutely right! I am, and I also would never qualify for a CI unless I developed a sudden profound loss or something, but the difference is, I'm keeping an OPEN MIND about the CI for children. Am I squeamish about implanting a baby? Yes, ofc I am, because it's surgery. But, reading these folks, listening, and keeping an open mind has helped me form alot of opinions about this. I really wish you would do the same.
 
Oceanbreeze, I don't have any cites but....HELLO! It is very beyond obvious that if hearing aids provide a varitety of listening capabiliites, then it stands to reason that CIs would too!
 
Oceanbreeze, I don't have any cites but....HELLO! It is very beyond obvious that if hearing aids provide a varitety of listening capabiliites, then it stands to reason that CIs would too!
The difference being that CI comes in view in those cases where there is little to no benefit expected from HA's

But weren't we discussing implanting children at VERY young age??

Wordrecognition.jpg
 
Oceanbreeze, I don't have any cites but....HELLO! It is very beyond obvious that if hearing aids provide a varitety of listening capabiliites, then it stands to reason that CIs would too!

Then, why do you always dwell on the negative? You're not very diplomatic when a parent has decided to implant their child. You want to do your level best to tell them they're wrong for their decision, and then steer them towards a more appropriate solution in your eyes.

Deafdyke, it's like this... No matter how much you dislike it, once a person has made up their mind to implant their child, there's not a whole lot you're gonna do about it.

Now about implanting babies, here's some facts based on common sense.

It's proven fact that CI success is subjective. I DO NOT dispute that, but in young child the likelihood of success is great. This is due to the fact that the child's brain is pliable. The earlier you are able to stimulate the auditory nerve and map the CI, the better the child may do.

That's common sense.

As I said, I don't like putting a baby through any kind of surgery, but if my child was profoundly deafened, and wouldn't get benefit from a HA, I would probably follow up with CI candidacy. I think it's a parents duty to do what is best for their child, and in my opinion, I could not/would not deny my child the chance to hear; even if it's just environmental sounds and the child still had to use sign to communicate.

To me, being able to hear something is better than not being able to hear anything!
 
it's hurt me so much when i see a kid who under 5 year old with CI.. I would disagree with this but agian i would rather to let the child choose with thier little life going on..

we can't put soo many going on in the childs life... it's child's life, their own little choice, thier own creatives, their own little memories.

all i care parent to watch the child's back to protect and make a better choice what is best for this child.. not just implant in the child till child understand the ci means.
 
Oceanbreeze, I realize that there are kids for whom hearing aids aren't going to do any good. Matter of fact, I support early implantation for kids with auditory nereopathy, which is a disorder that can easily be dx, and there's really no ambiguity about whether or not hearing aids could help them. I am not Sweetmind. I am also very pro-implantation for those kids for whom hearing aids have not been at all sucessful. I'm simply cautioning against the almost "selling" of CIs. Like I can remember when digital aids or high powered aids were supposed to be THE ANSWER. This almost seems to be the same.
That's all.......i'm just very cynical about these things.
 
OH......and almost forgot.......as a sociologist I wonder exactly how much oral and listening achievement is due to the CI or due to the possibilty of families who encourage overachieving or hyperprograming, just really melding with oral techniques? Parental involvement is vital for oral techniques to work.......
 
OH......and almost forgot.......as a sociologist I wonder exactly how much oral and listening achievement is due to the CI or due to the possibilty of families who encourage overachieving or hyperprograming, just really melding with oral techniques? Parental involvement is vital for oral techniques to work.......
So, as a sociologist you can't imaging that a child which can hear using CI will develop as a child with normal hearing... there has to be something additional?? You underestimate the child AND stigmatise the parents. (Encourage overachieving or hyperprograming...???)
With both HA's and CI the parents are - or should be - involved in the learning proces. Neither tool will make it all happen by itself. Both are designed to facilitate communication, but work in different ways with different outcomes.
 
it's hurt me so much when i see a kid who under 5 year old with CI.. I would disagree with this but agian i would rather to let the child choose with thier little life going on..

we can't put soo many going on in the childs life... it's child's life, their own little choice, thier own creatives, their own little memories.

all i care parent to watch the child's back to protect and make a better choice what is best for this child.. not just implant in the child till child understand the ci means.
Letting the child choose would mean depriving her of possibilities.
The intention might be good, but in practice the child would be so far behind that a succesful use of CI is largely diminished.
If you really want to give the deaf child a chance, then you should implant as soon as possible and later on start with sign and deaf culture. That way it will get the best of these two "worlds".
 
I think parents need to ensure their children have a language be it ASL or spoken english. The earlier, the better. Research has shown that if a child learns a language at an earlier age, they will pick up on different language more easily. So if a child is born deaf, then I believe parents need to sign with their children just to make sure they have a language developed so whether they get CI or HA or decide to go with ASL only, they will be better off.
 
Back
Top