Cochlear Implants: Sooner Is Better For Deaf Children

[Kalista]

The main point is that my body don't belongs to my parents or to the doctors. My parents knew about cochlear implants and they just need a commucation though speech and hearing, but too bad. I am deaf and my parent need to learn the asl.

Anyway!

Cochlear Implant is best for people who were born as hearing and in later of their life and they became deaf. Cochlear Implant is a best choice for them. That's my advice.

If you were deaf at whole of your lifetime, Cochlear Implant is a holocust. It only product the sounds but mostly of time you won't able to understand the people's speaking. I believe Cohclear Implant do destroys the deaf culture in many different ways.

For your information, whole that I posted about Cohclear Implant were based on my experince and my opinion. You may take it or not.

Wow, Thanks for your sharing your story with us. I can't image what you go through like that !!

I recommend you to see the movie, it called "At First Sight". It made me emotional and grevious what this man went through for his girlfriend's sake. He is very happy to be blind. Just like, I am very happy to be Deaf since my birth. God makes me.. I accept for who I am..

Meg:

Your ASL is fine with me. Do not be silly. :P When, we were drinking... our Sign were making no sense. Damn... We did not stay at Mall of American to do shopping forever ! When we enter that Mall... We were :jaw: and overwhelmed with bunches of stores...

Dang... We did not bring the sleep bags overnight there to miss the planes.

 

[DeafSCUBA98]

wow... Mall of America seems nothing to me :P

anyway when did u guys went to mall of america?

Anyway back to topic.....

I understand its better at earlier in age.. but yikes.. i believe some parents should wait till they're fully comfirm that babies are totally deaf before they preform the operation.

but still.. its parents power to do it.. and there's nothing we can do.

before when i was in high school i'm totally against CI.. but right now.. i'm thinking of getting one.. odd?

 

[Gemtun]

before when i was in high school i'm totally against CI.. but right now.. i'm thinking of getting one.. odd?[/QUOTE]

No, it is not odd because I was that way too. I was so AGAINST a CI and was very mad when I found out some friends and my brother getting a CI.

But the older I get, the more mellow I become and realize that we are still deaf, no matter what. I just want another tool to add to my life tools to cope within this world.

 

[Crazymanw00t]

Wow, Thanks for your sharing your story with us. I can't image what you go through like that !!

I recommend you to see the movie, it called "At First Sight". It made me emotional and grevious what this man went through for his girlfriend's sake. He is very happy to be blind. Just like, I am very happy to be Deaf since my birth. God makes me.. I accept for who I am..

Meg:

Your ASL is fine with me. Do not be silly. :P When, we were drinking... our Sign were making no sense. Damn... We did not stay at Mall of American to do shopping forever ! When we enter that Mall... We were :jaw: and overwhelmed with bunches of stores...

Dang... We did not bring the sleep bags overnight there to miss the planes.

Yeah after watching that movie, it made me to speak up for those suffered CI people. It was a great movie.

 

[deafdyke]

BUT i hope this isn't gonna keep them from their own culture, lauguage and people.

That is a huge concern, especially since the professional "expert" opinon is that hoh kids don't need ASL/Sign. Then again, I've noticed that some of the parents who choose oral only aren't anti-ASL...they just want their kid's first language to be spoken English.

in my opinion, i would let my kid growing up in speech/hearing therapy and when he/she is old enough to understand about implantation, let him/her decide wether they'd like to get implant.

If my kid got little to no benifit from traditional aids (auditory nereopathy or were at risk for ossification after being deafened by mengintas for example) I would implant them but raise them with a bilingal approach so they'd have choices. However if they got quite a lot of benifit from traditional aids, I would probaly wait until they were a little older, so they could help make the decision and give better feedback as to what they actually hear with hearing aids.

i believe some parents should wait till they're fully comfirm that babies are totally deaf before they preform the operation.

Yes, me too. There are people and kids out there who are straight off the bat canidates for CI, and there's nothing wrong with that. I'm just kind of uncomfortable with hearing that some people are getting implanted b/c they can't talk on the phone, or they have trouble listening in noisy situtions. What next? Are they going to claim that a CI can decipher the words to Louie, Louie or Smells Like Teen Spirit or decipher Henry Kissenger's accent?
I definitly think that if a kid is a good hearing aid user, that the parents should be legally bound to wait until the kid is a little older.

 

[Gemtun]

I definitly think that if a kid is a good hearing aid user, that the parents should be legally bound to wait until the kid is a little older.

Legally bound? Since when it should become a law to force parents to pick communication modes for their own children? Parents should have control over what they feel is best for their children.

 

[deafdyke]

Legally bound? Since when it should become a law to force parents to pick communication modes for their own children? Parents should have control over what they feel is best for their children.

Huh? I didn't say anything about commuication modes. I just think that if a kid is a good hearing aid user, but is eligable to be implanted b/c they might be able to hear better, the parents should wait until the kid is a little older to make the decision. If the benifit would be ambigious, it's best for the kids and the parents to wait and decide on implantation together.
If a kid doesn't get any benifit from aids or only gets a very small amount of input from their aids (they can only say a very small number of words) then yes, parents should opt for implantation, no questions asked. However, if the kid has really good input from their aids (they can hear above 45% with aids) then it would be best for the parents to wait until at least their dhh kids are in upper elementary school. I've heard of kids getting implanted who have 80% hearing with hearing aids!!!! (that BTW was my maximum hearing with aids when I was in elementary school...and I only had a moderately severe loss!) And it has nothing to do with commuication modes. I remember Ginette saying that she thought that the current trend of implanting kids was extreme...and she's oral (doesn't sign) and I remember hohprofessor saying something along those lines too!

 

[DEAFNIGGAfasho]

Well i think you really should get implants because then you can hear all the guys giv eyou compliments

 

[Nesmuth]

Children with hearing disabilities should get the implants early as possible so they can get the best opportunities to help them achieve their fullest potential. If they dont like it later on life, they're more free to stop using it and join the ASL based deaf communities.

Right?

Richard Roehm

 

[deafdyke]

should get the implants early as possible so they can get the best opportunities to help them achieve their fullest potential.

Nesmuth, there is a population that is right off the bat canidates for CI. There's nothing wrong with implanting a kid who gets very poor benifit from hearing aids...and early amplification is a good thing...however it's hard to accurately tell how well a kid hears. I know of kids who tested as profound on ABR but who tested as hoh on tradtional auditremy.

 

[deafdyke]

I just think that if a kid is a good hearing aid user, but is eligable to be implanted b/c they might be able to hear better, the parents should wait until the kid is a little older to make the decision. If the benifit would be ambigious, it's best for the kids and the parents to wait and decide on implantation together.

Just wanted to elaborate on this post.....As I've said before there is nothing wrong with implanting a kid who gets very little benifit from aids. However according to Ling and other oral experts most deaf kids CAN learn to speak via being amplified with hearing aids. I think the stats(according to Auditory-Verbal International) say that something like 95% of deaf kids can understand speech with traditional hearing aids...and these stats are from the '70's, with "primative" analogs! So unless my kid was in the 5% that was a CI canidate right off the bat, I would definitly wait until my kid was a little older for implantation.

 

[HelloKittyGal]

I know it's a little weird, but the younger, the better. It's totally safe and the risks are just as any other operation in the world wether you are a child or an adult. The truth is that most deaf children recover faster than adults. It took me a week to feel normal, but a few months to feel completely normal without any dizziness. Kids usually are up and running in a day or a few days.

I support it because you can't go back once the child grows up. The earlier, the better, it's a fact. I know children can't decide, but what else can you do? Wait? If you consider that it's faster to learn with the CI as a child, which one would I choose? I say implant anyway if the parents feel it is right. There can be a few that don't benefit, but that's the truth of life with any other operations that pass or fail. Sometimes the positive outweights the negative especially when the numbers of negatives are small and the positive way bigger. Just have hope and hope for the best.

 

[deafdyke]

it's faster to learn with the CI as a child, which one would I choose? I say implant anyway if the parents feel it is right. There can be a few that don't benefit,

There IS a population that is right off the bat canidates for CI(or auditory brainstem implants) ...and I have no problems whatsoever with those kids being implanted...I just think that in ambigious cases, that parents should wait til their kids are a little older so that the kids themselves can help decide. There's nothing wrong with implanting a kid who gets minmal benifit from traditional aids...and there's nothing wrong with implanting a toddler who has aquirred a handful of words (still has very very clinicaly signifcient expressive language delay) but implanting a kid b/c they might be able to talk on the phone or b/c they have trouble talking in crowded situtions is just rediclous!

 

[HelloKittyGal]

You have reasons, but I don't know what else could we do that could predict the future on how children will do. I have heard for 2 very ASL kids who got CI in when they got around 9 and 14. They never heard their whole lives or talked, but they were improving and trying to make speech sounds.

I don't think it's a bad idea to make telephone a part of their lives. I have to admit that the relay sucks. There could be parents who are too desperate, but we can only teach the medical field and parents about all options. There are still some doctors out there who will tell their parents that their child won't be able to talk. :sure: Who are we to blame it all on parents lack of research?

My mother did not learn about cochlear implants, she did not learn about auditory verbal therapy. At one point, she went to a meeting where oralism was believed to be right, so that's what my mom felt was right, and I grew up that way. I don't have any resentment of her upbrining, and I would have loved for her to give me a cochlear implant as a child. The doctor did not believe I would speak as good as I am doing now. I don't think it's the parents to blame at all. Doctors even told my mother I had no hearing problem which in fact I did, so I had a few years delay of speech and hearing with HA.

To outlaw cochlear implants in children would be very barbaric, but I would think that parents should be mandated to research and talk to people with cochlear implants. Again, even with all that, I am sure that some parents would still make a choice that may not turn out positive, which I know that nothing is perfect in life, but outlawing cochlear implant in children would be completely barbaric because it works for many.

 

[deafdyke]

but I don't know what else could we do that could predict the future on how children will do.

Again, I have NO problems whatsoever with implanting kids who get little to no benifit from aids....it's just that when they are implanting severe-profound kids who get 80% of what's said with aids...something is messed up.

I don't think it's a bad idea to make telephone a part of their lives. I have to admit that the relay sucks.

I never said that the abilty to talk on the phone was a bad thing.I just think some people harp on it too much. I remember reading somewhere an account of an implantation where the subject yapped constantly about how she had always been a phone using indivdual (before losing her residual hearing) Hearing on the phone is nice, but on the other hand you don't have to deal with stupid telemarketers or people with VERY SOFT voices.

There could be parents who are too desperate, but we can only teach the medical field and parents about all options. There are still some doctors out there who will tell their parents that their child won't be able to talk. Who are we to blame it all on parents lack of research?

That's very true. I just wish more parents didn't get biased information or information designed to appeal to the feeling that they "lost" a hearing child.

To outlaw cochlear implants in children would be very barbaric, but I would think that parents should be mandated to research and talk to people with cochlear implants. Again, even with all that, I am sure that some parents would still make a choice that may not turn out positive, which I know that nothing is perfect in life, but outlawing cochlear implant in children would be completely barbaric because it works for many.

No, I am not saying to outlaw them. I just think that the criteria for implantation is a little too liberal these days. I definitly think that parents should do all the research nessary...but a lot of the info out there is VERY highly biased!

 

[HelloKittyGal]

Again, I have NO problems whatsoever with implanting kids who get little to no benifit from aids....it's just that when they are implanting severe-profound kids who get 80% of what's said with aids...something is messed up.

Seriously? Where did you get this information? You cannot get a CI if you get 80 percent of words correct on a test. They do several tests on children than they do adults.

I never said that the abilty to talk on the phone was a bad thing.I just think some people harp on it too much. I remember reading somewhere an account of an implantation where the subject yapped constantly about how she had always been a phone using indivdual (before losing her residual hearing) Hearing on the phone is nice, but on the other hand you don't have to deal with stupid telemarketers or people with VERY SOFT voices.

So what? If they yapped, what's so annoying about that? It's an amazing journey for them. I don't think you'll know until you experience it. I think a lot of CI people enjoy telling telemarketers off. CI people have to learn the tricks hearing imparied people use. They tell them to speak up. Hearing someone's voice over the phone...you don't know how amazing that can be. BTW, we rarely get telemarketer calls at home. You can just hang up, nobody's forcing you to hear telemarketers. You can get caller ID to pick up only the ones you know. It's an individual choice.

That's very true. I just wish more parents didn't get biased information or information designed to appeal to the feeling that they "lost" a hearing child.

Where did you get that parents get biased information? I am sure there are so many who get both sides. I am not sure where you are coming from. I just don't think you know that much on how many parents are informed of both sides. I think parents want to give children a broader opportunity to hear and struggle less. My deafness was a bomb to my mother's heart. We'll never understand parent's feelings, but that's what happens most of the time.

No, I am not saying to outlaw them. I just think that the criteria for implantation is a little too liberal these days. I definitly think that parents should do all the research nessary...but a lot of the info out there is VERY highly biased!

I doubt it's liberal. The criteria has become more open, but that's because they have found that many benefit more from the CI. I would not have been a candidate as a child because of the criteria, but now I can because the criteria has expanded, so I get more fromt the CI than my 2 hearing aids. How is that bad? You have to remember that it took YEARS of studies to expand those criterias before approving it. It's not that liberal. You can't score 80 percent and get a CI. I think the criteria is now about 40 percent. Where are the biased information? Where do you mean 'out there'? The internet? I know the internet you will hear mainly from the positive ones. You can't blame that because which CI people want to babble about their failure? I have talked to a few that their CI was not that great, but still wore them because a little was still helpful.

I don't know, but I think you are making up a lot of things that you THINK happens so often which is so not true. I have talked to all sides online including parents. They seem to be very careful and attentive to their childrens' success.

 

[deafdyke]

Seriously? Where did you get this information? You cannot get a CI if you get 80 percent of words correct on a test. They do several tests on children than they do adults.

Apparently that's what I thought, too but a couple of people on a hearing aid listserv (that isn't pro-deaf culture BTW) mentioned that young relatives of theirs who were really excellent hearing aid users, got implanted. I'm not making it up! They really are getting a little too liberal with pediatric implantation canidates. A couple other posters here(and no....they are not pro-deaf....matter of fact Ginnete is oral {she rejected Sign as a little girl} have said they think so as well! I remember a parent of profoundly deaf kids who used to post on deafnotes a few years ago, said that she got her kids implanted even thou they were VERY good hearing aid users. (10% of words without hearing aids and high 60% with hearing aids) On the parentdeaf-hh list, they said that now essentially what qualifies a kid as an implant canidate is the severity of their loss...not nessarily that they don't get too much benifit from hearing aids.
I remember a few parents on the parent deaf-hh list saying that their audis were really really pushing the CI for their kids who were really really good hearing aid users.
I know that the implantation criteria for kids is stricter then for adults...and I think that is awesome! At least some kids might be able to choose of their own free will.....and yes, implantation HAS gotten liberalized. Go over to hearingexchange....you will meet a mother of a little girl who has moderate-to severe loss in one ear (very aidable, and does wear a hearing aid in that ear) She also has a profound loss in the other ear. She could have gotten along fine with just one ear aided (many did and do) but her mother got her other ear implanted. Oh, and not all implantees acheive Hoh levels with implants. Sucess ranges from mild hearing loss levels to only being able to detect enviromental sounds. Most implantees fall between those two extremes.
Even today with the newer implants, pediatric implantees are evenly divided between oral-only and TCers (and it even says so on the implant sites!)
Even over at HealthyNormalHearingExchange, they admit that sucess isn't the same for everyone. To someone with a progressive loss mild levels are a sucess. To someone else hearing 50% is a sucess, to another person hearing enviromental noises is a sucess...to another being able to tell the difference between different sounds is a sucess. It's so indivdualized that you really can't genralize.

 

[HelloKittyGal]

Yes, but did they succeed despite their great hearing aid use? That's the thing that matters. I know a few who are opening up doors for certain people, yes. The point that matters is that if you improved MORE with the CI. The CI can sound more natural than HA and give you more crisper and sharper and more sounds in frequency ranges.

I was a good hearing aid user. I am bilingual. Spanish and English. They were not equipped with testing me in my primary language. I do bet that I would have done much better in Spanish where I got almost nothing in English. There's no doubt that I get much more out of the CI than my HA. You can be a good hearing aid user, but a CI can give you more and that's what people want. I don't see what's wrong with that.

Did you hear about the little deaf boy in Canada? He could not get a CI because he was too deaf and not oral to receive a CI. The parents raised money and he got a CI in the USA. He is doing rather well, attempting to talk at 9 years old! He was not an oral boy.

See why I don't see the real hype about the CI? Because both sides can be wrong.

 

[deafpscc]

Hey.. Its great to have young kids... Acutal baby to be implanted but they wont be benfit from deaf community. THey more likely to be rasied as a oralism....

Ought to let you know... Myself.. I have cochlear implant and uses sign language. I know what It is like to be oral becuase I used to be one.

 

[Mc Gusto]

If i ever had a deaf kid i wouldn't make them have c.i, just like religion i would let them make up their own mind when they were old enough