Some children who are born deaf recover from their deafness

[rick48]

Guess hard work doesn't count...

Cloggy,

Not hard work but a labor of love! LOL

They just don't get it. Never have, never will. They cannot see past their petty and self-limiting personal bias and animosity towards those who chose a different path then they chose for their children. The "hard work" comes from making it playful and enjoyable for your child like playing Barbie with her for hours, reading non-stop, talking about everything you see and do together with your child. As you will see and are seeing, the end result will be that Lotte uses spoken language fluently and you will have a close relationship with her.

My wife and I think nothing was more rewwarding and worthwhile then the time we spent with our daughter. Of course, if we had utilized sign, we would have spent all those same hours learning it and teaching sign to her and then the close-minded set here would be calling us great parents!

Like I say Cloggy, just consider the source and keep on keeping on!
Rick

 

[R2D2]

Iam using his situation as an example of the hearing tests being subjective not for CI issues.

Yes - I think everyone would agree with you on that. That's why they are repeated so often.

 

[shel90]

Cloggy,

Not hard work but a labor of love! LOL

They just don't get it. Never have, never will. They cannot see past their petty and self-limiting personal bias and animosity towards those who chose a different path then they chose for their children. The "hard work" comes from making it playful and enjoyable for your child like playing Barbie with her for hours, reading non-stop, talking about everything you see and do together with your child. As you will see and are seeing, the end result will be that Lotte uses spoken language fluently and you will have a close relationship with her.

My wife and I think nothing was more rewwarding and worthwhile then the time we spent with our daughter. Of course, if we had utilized sign, we would have spent all those same hours learning it and teaching sign to her and then the close-minded set here would be calling us great parents!

Like I say Cloggy, just consider the source and keep on keeping on!
Rick

Unfortunately too many parents of deaf children both implanted or non implanted dont do that kind of hard work. That is what we are talking about here. I have met too many of those parents who would try for a short time doing all those things u brought up but then they get distracted by other things or make the assumption that the CI will do the work. What happens? The children end up being delayed in language..At least in a signing environment in the educational setting, the children are being exposed to language. I couldnt imagine them being in an oral only program if they werent benefitting from it at all.

That is what "we" are referring to..not u and Cloggy. Maybe try not to be so defensive next time and not assume that "we" are just talking about u both only. We are talking about what is still happening and how to address them. You both are more focused on the oral success which is fine..that's your interest but just because that is not in our field or experiences doesnt make us "petty".

 

[rick48]

I noticed that too. A LOT of it, does seem to be connected with having "designer" high acheiver kids. They buy into (admittly biased) marketing of oral only as being for high acheiver types. Like the unspoken message is that if the parent choses oral only, the kids will be fluent in seven languages (the kid from the 60's or 70's who spoke seven languages) or who will be otherwise "high acheieving"
There's no mention of the possibilty that the kid will have some spoken language skills, but not have a complete mastery of speech.
Like Oticon's booklet on methodolgy says that its VERY common for oral only dhh kids to say stuff like "How many spiders have legs?" for "how many legs do spiders have?"
Rick, you don't understand..........NONE of us are anti oral skills. We just think that pro-oral people should be more open to Sign as a possible helpful tool, that could REALLY help dhh kids.
I know SO many exoral kids who say they wish they'd learned Sign early on.
Why do pro oral-onliers insist that oral skills be the be all and end all of a dhh kids' existance? Why should life be an eternal speech therapy session for a dhh kid?
You simply do not see the downsides of oral only. Yes, its great that it worked for your daughter, but it's NOT a perfect method. It's just that you lucked out that it seemed to be a perfect fit. Your family didn't experiance a lot of the inequalities and fighting with special ed providers and things like that that a lot of other families experiance!

Dd in post 181

"Very few dhh kids will need lifelong speech therapy. I have never said otherwise."

dd in post 201

"Why should life be an eternal speech therapy session for a dhh kid?"

Which one is it? At least pick one false statement and stick with it.

Here are some more gems from post 181

"plus, a lot of them have advantages like very hyperinvolved parents. not just involved parents, but the type of parent who would buy their kids toys to increase their sat scores"

Exactly what is an example of a toy that increases your SAT score? I just spent the entire weekend on the softball field with my other daughter, maybe I ought to be getting her one of those toys instead of a composite bat!

"Rick, i am using "graduated" not as anything having to do with high school, but rather in the sense that someone has sucessfully completed a particualar course of study. In this case, the course of study is speech and language.
Have you never heard that used that way?"

Nope. Speech and language therapy is a service provided for in a child's IEP and not a course of study but why let the facts get in the way of your bizarre points?


"The evidence that oral-only isn't effective or good at teaching dhh kids spoken language, is evident in the fact that deaf people (whole population) have lower verbal iqs then hearing people. verbal iq measures the mastery of a languauge. now if oral kids had mastered the english language then they would have average verbal iqs. but they don't."


How is it evident? You make a generalized statement about oral-only but cite a reference to the entire deaf population of which oral-only is but a subset. It may be true but it may not, sorry but you have failed to produce the "hard numbers" to back up what is merely your opinion.


And of course your excuse as to why you are unable to produce the "hard numbers" to back up your opinions is because...

"perhaps that is b/c the oral industry is afraid of what such studies would reveal."


But of course, that is the only rational explanation why you cannot find any evidence. Its all a grand conspiracy! I guess I am just part of the vast oral wing conspiracy!


dd in post 201

"They buy into (admittly biased) marketing of oral only as being for high acheiver types. Like the unspoken message is that if the parent choses oral only, the kids will be fluent in seven languages (the kid from the 60's or 70's who spoke seven languages) or who will be otherwise "high acheieving"


The "unspoken message"????? "Fluent in seven languages"??? Do you really believe this crap or do you just merely regurgitate the same old garbage post after post after post?


dd, further in post 201

"Rick, you don't understand.........
You simply do not see the downsides of oral only. Yes, its great that it worked for your daughter, but it's NOT a perfect method. It's just that you lucked out that it seemed to be a perfect fit. Your family didn't experiance a lot of the inequalities and fighting with special ed providers and things like that that a lot of other families experiance!"

Your problem is that I do understand and so do many, many other parents like myself and Cloggy. I understand both the downsides and upsides of the approach that we chose for our daughter, which by the way, I have stated many times is what worked best for her and that parents need to find the method, whatever it may be, that works best for their child. I am not the one who claims that there is only one way to raise all deaf children, I have always maintained that what worked best for our child will not necessarily be the best option for someone else's child.

Can you please tell me where I ever said that the oral only was the perfect method for raising all deaf children. Find it, I know you will not, but that does not stop you from misrepresenting what I say.

"Lucked out", "luck of the draw"?? If you think "luck" is the reason why my daughter succeeded orally then besides being condescending and patronizing you are even more ignorant and biased then I thought. Funny, deny your kid a ci but choose sign and you are a concerned and dedicated parent but if you choose a ci for your child and give them oral speech and language threapy then you do not "understand" and maybe you will "luck" out but in the end of course your child may still yet become miserable and hate you in the future.

BTW what do you know about what we experienced in getting the proper services for our daughter? Please tell everyone.

After reading your posts, all I can do is quote the immortal words of James Tiberius Kirk: "Beam me up Scotty, there are no signs of intelligent life here."
Rick

 

[Cloggy]

Once again you are twisting my words. And it's jillio, not jullio.

Sorry Jillio,

But I'm not twisting your words. I gave a 1 to 1 comparison... and instead of replying to it, you say I twisted your words... ?????

Nope,
You said:

Originally Posted by jillio:
Of course hard work counts--and that is just the point. Language acquisition isn't supposed to be hard work, it is a naturally occuring process. When it is turned into something that requires hard work, problems are created for the child.

The comparison is:

Walking is also a natural proces.
You are saying that when a child who has never been able to walk, and by operation obtains the ability to do so..... NOTHING should be done to help, because "it is a naturally occuring process" and "when it is turned into something that requires hard work, problems are created for the child..."

That's your point of view when you talk about children that learn to interpret sounds with CI....

No twisting of words....

 

[Cloggy]

..............

That is what "we" are referring to..not u and Cloggy. Maybe try not to be so defensive next time and not assume that "we" are just talking about u both only. We are talking about what is still happening and how to address them. You both are more focused on the oral success which is fine..that's your interest but just because that is not in our field or experiences doesnt make us "petty".

The problem is.....
We (rick and me) are looked upon as the "lucky" ones. That the development of our children is some fluke of nature, and perhaps, when dealing with children that do have problems, it might appear that way.
But while looking it from your side, you're ignoring the experience that Rick has with children (not just his own daughter).

Tell me Shel, Jillio
When a hearing couple decided that they want to have their child (with CI) to learn sign language... how much time will they need to spent in order for them and the child to learn sign. (And I mean sign language, not sign to assist with speech...)?
10 hours a week? And where is this time coming from..... It needs to come from a reduction in time spend on speech and hearing.... !!!!

When communication works why would someone put more pressure on a child, and themself to learn an extra language.
That would be like someone learning Chinese just in case one ends up in china and needs to ask for directions....

 

[Cloggy]

................... Funny, deny your kid a ci but choose sign and you are a concerned and dedicated parent but if you choose a ci for your child and give them oral speech and language threapy then you do not "understand" and maybe you will "luck" out but in the end of course your child may still yet become miserable and hate you in the future.
................

Rick... now you get it... There's a good lucky boy !!

 

[shel90]

The problem is.....
We (rick and me) are looked upon as the "lucky" ones. That the development of our children is some fluke of nature, and perhaps, when dealing with children that do have problems, it might appear that way.
But while looking it from your side, you're ignoring the experience that Rick has with children (not just his own daughter).

Tell me Shel, Jillio
When a hearing couple decided that they want to have their child (with CI) to learn sign language... how much time will they need to spent in order for them and the child to learn sign. (And I mean sign language, not sign to assist with speech...)?
10 hours a week? And where is this time coming from..... It needs to come from a reduction in time spend on speech and hearing.... !!!!

When communication works why would someone put more pressure on a child, and themself to learn an extra language.
That would be like someone learning Chinese just in case one ends up in china and needs to ask for directions....

I have never ignored your and Rick's experiences. I have applaud u and be happy for u.

Guess learning sign for the children is just too hard for many parents. Takes time away from speech and listening skills. Now, I know many parents stand on about speech and listening skills. Just too bad that not all deaf children will pick up on it so what to do? Probably too late for those chidlren since they would have been language deprived by then. That's my whole point.

 

[jillio]

Unfortunately too many parents of deaf children both implanted or non implanted dont do that kind of hard work. That is what we are talking about here. I have met too many of those parents who would try for a short time doing all those things u brought up but then they get distracted by other things or make the assumption that the CI will do the work. What happens? The children end up being delayed in language..At least in a signing environment in the educational setting, the children are being exposed to language. I couldnt imagine them being in an oral only program if they werent benefitting from it at all.

That is what "we" are referring to..not u and Cloggy. Maybe try not to be so defensive next time and not assume that "we" are just talking about u both only. We are talking about what is still happening and how to address them. You both are more focused on the oral success which is fine..that's your interest but just because that is not in our field or experiences doesnt make us "petty".

Exactly. And what is not understood here is that most parents seem to fall into the second category, and those are the children that you and I deal with on a daily basis. Anytime "we" mention the need for additional services,"they" see it as a personal attack, when it never was, and never will be. It is not an attack at all, but advocacy for the children that do still need services that aren't being provided. And there are certainly more of them on my caseload than there are those who don't. And I'm certaint hat is your experience as well, shel. And I have been attacked, as often, for choosing not to implant my son, and permit him to function in the way that he is most comfortable and successful, as those who feel they have been attacked for implanting. Never once have I told a parent they were wrong for implanting their child. I have merely stated that despite the apparent successes in the oral camp, there are still issues related to deafness that need to be addressed for these children--that oral or signing, implanted, aided, or non-aided--they are still deaf, and therefore, will still be marginalized to some degree by the rest of hearing society.

 

[jillio]

Sorry Jillio,

But I'm not twisting your words. I gave a 1 to 1 comparison... and instead of replying to it, you say I twisted your words... ?????

Nope,
You said:

The comparison is:


That's your point of view when you talk about children that learn to interpret sounds with CI....

No twisting of words....

Yes, it is a twisting of words, but perhaps you aren't grasping the nuances of semantics and pragmatics because English is not your native language.

You cannot comapre walking to auditory function, as one affects communication which means it impacts life functioning in an all encompassing way; there is not an area of an individuals life that is not affected by communication. Mobility issues, while having an negative impact on many of life's area, do not impact in the same way and as all encopassing way as does hearing loss and subsequent communication issues. Therefore, they are not comparable. Secodnly, I have never said than nothing should be done to assist children with hearing loss or children with mobility issues. In fact, I advocate strongly for the use of all tools for the individual child. That means everything cloggy--not just one thing. You cannot impalnt a child with CI, and expect them to function as ahearing child simply because they have a surgicla implant that artificially stimulates hearing. Nor can you leave a child to function sole with ASL skills alone and expect them to be successful. I gave my son what he needed, and he has excellent oral skills, as well as ASL skills. He was provided speech therapy, and he was provided the most poerful HA's available. He CHOOSE to use sign as his preferred method of communication, and as he was provided the opportunity to affilitate with both the hearing world and the Deaf world, was able to make the decision for himself to ID as Deaf. He was provided the opportunity to make the comaprison and decide where he was most comfortable. Unless a child is provided the opportunity to be exposed to both they know only one, and therefore are unable to make a comparison. These are the children that end up having problems because they have only been permitted exposure to a hearing world where they are always, always percieved as different, and therefore marginalized by the hearing world. No matter how great their oral skills are, and how proud their families may be, and how "normal" and hearing their families may perceive them to be, when they get out into the real world, they are perceived as not hearing. and different, and therefore, will be treated as such. All of a sudden, these kids are thrust into a world very different fromthe protected atmosphere provided by their parents, and they suffer because of it, because they have never been shown that there is another place for them where they aren't considered to be different, where their sameness of experience can be shared and understood. And yes, it affects their self esteem, their identity, and their mental and emotional health and well being. Your daughter is still young. I am talking about preparing these kids for the realities of life, not whether they can speak or whether they sign. I don't goive a damn how they communicate--I care that they CAN communicate. I don't give a damn whether they are mainstreamed or whether they attend a deaf school, as long as they are provided ALL that they need in that educational environment. Where the difference of opinion comes in is that I have not seen that kids in the mainstream are provided with all they need to receive education equal to that of their hearing peers. THAT, my friend is what I object to. You are the one that has turned this into an issue of proCi or antiCI. I am and always will be pro deaf child, whether than child is impanted, unaided, or HA. You on the other hand, have drawn the dividing line, and cannot see any further than the CI issue. You are so busy extollong the wonderful new miracle of science that you cannot see any further than your own nose and realize that there are still numerous children out there who do not, and never will, receive the same advantages as your daughter does, and these children still deserve every oportunity in life to succeed. Great for you and great for your daughter. I hope that you will continue to acheive the same successes without any setbacks as she grows older. But, and this is a big BUT, there are parents out there who do not enjoy the same successes that you have, but they expect that is what they are supposed to receive, and therefore, do not recognize that their child is in need of more than is being provided. These are the kids that get so far behind that the mainstream schools finally agree to send them to a school for the deaf becasue the mainstream no longer knows what to do with them. And then the schools for the deaf are blamed for low literacy rates, and second rate education. When the truth of the matter is, if these parents had opened their eyes and realized that there is more at stake than whether a child can speak as well as their hearing peers, they would never have fallen behaind to start with.

My comments are not all addressed to you personally, or to rick48 either, for that matter. But neither one of you can break out of your own silly little worlds long enough to realize that there are concerns greater than the ones you have for yourselves. Just as I no longer worry about my son, as he has proven that he can be successful, and can compete in the hearing world on his own terms. I did my job with him, and I did it damned well, if I may say so myself. Now I am working with and for other deaf children, and I wish for them the same as I wished for my son. To be able to compete and be successful on their own terms, whatever those terms may be. I am no longer locked into the world as it only revolves around my son. He was the impetus for my becoming involved in assisting the children that still need assistance, because I saw far too many children going without the services they needed becasue their parents had no idea what their needs were or how to address them. My son didn't need the assistance of an advocate--he had one. Me. But too many chioldren don't have a parent that is capable of, or even wants to, serve as their advocate, and it is not right that these children should be provided a lesser opportunity because of that. But you have to look beyond your own little world to understand that cloggy. You speak of one child, I speak of deaf children. You speak of your daughter, I reference my son, but speak of the numerous studnets I am in contact with on a daily basis. You insist on keeping the focus on your child, and I am telling you that there are other children out there--look a little farther, cloggy, and perhaps you will begin to understand that you and your daughter both have been very lucky, very blessed. Have a little gratitude for that blessing, and perhaps it will increase your tolerance and your empathy for those children who still struggle.

 

[jillio]

Dd in post 181

"Very few dhh kids will need lifelong speech therapy. I have never said otherwise."

dd in post 201

"Why should life be an eternal speech therapy session for a dhh kid?"

Which one is it? At least pick one false statement and stick with it.

Here are some more gems from post 181

"plus, a lot of them have advantages like very hyperinvolved parents. not just involved parents, but the type of parent who would buy their kids toys to increase their sat scores"

Exactly what is an example of a toy that increases your SAT score? I just spent the entire weekend on the softball field with my other daughter, maybe I ought to be getting her one of those toys instead of a composite bat!

"Rick, i am using "graduated" not as anything having to do with high school, but rather in the sense that someone has sucessfully completed a particualar course of study. In this case, the course of study is speech and language.
Have you never heard that used that way?"

Nope. Speech and language therapy is a service provided for in a child's IEP and not a course of study but why let the facts get in the way of your bizarre points?


"The evidence that oral-only isn't effective or good at teaching dhh kids spoken language, is evident in the fact that deaf people (whole population) have lower verbal iqs then hearing people. verbal iq measures the mastery of a languauge. now if oral kids had mastered the english language then they would have average verbal iqs. but they don't."


How is it evident? You make a generalized statement about oral-only but cite a reference to the entire deaf population of which oral-only is but a subset. It may be true but it may not, sorry but you have failed to produce the "hard numbers" to back up what is merely your opinion.


And of course your excuse as to why you are unable to produce the "hard numbers" to back up your opinions is because...

"perhaps that is b/c the oral industry is afraid of what such studies would reveal."


But of course, that is the only rational explanation why you cannot find any evidence. Its all a grand conspiracy! I guess I am just part of the vast oral wing conspiracy!


dd in post 201

"They buy into (admittly biased) marketing of oral only as being for high acheiver types. Like the unspoken message is that if the parent choses oral only, the kids will be fluent in seven languages (the kid from the 60's or 70's who spoke seven languages) or who will be otherwise "high acheieving"


The "unspoken message"????? "Fluent in seven languages"??? Do you really believe this crap or do you just merely regurgitate the same old garbage post after post after post?


dd, further in post 201

"Rick, you don't understand.........
You simply do not see the downsides of oral only. Yes, its great that it worked for your daughter, but it's NOT a perfect method. It's just that you lucked out that it seemed to be a perfect fit. Your family didn't experiance a lot of the inequalities and fighting with special ed providers and things like that that a lot of other families experiance!"

Your problem is that I do understand and so do many, many other parents like myself and Cloggy. I understand both the downsides and upsides of the approach that we chose for our daughter, which by the way, I have stated many times is what worked best for her and that parents need to find the method, whatever it may be, that works best for their child. I am not the one who claims that there is only one way to raise all deaf children, I have always maintained that what worked best for our child will not necessarily be the best option for someone else's child.

Can you please tell me where I ever said that the oral only was the perfect method for raising all deaf children. Find it, I know you will not, but that does not stop you from misrepresenting what I say.

"Lucked out", "luck of the draw"?? If you think "luck" is the reason why my daughter succeeded orally then besides being condescending and patronizing you are even more ignorant and biased then I thought. Funny, deny your kid a ci but choose sign and you are a concerned and dedicated parent but if you choose a ci for your child and give them oral speech and language threapy then you do not "understand" and maybe you will "luck" out but in the end of course your child may still yet become miserable and hate you in the future.

BTW what do you know about what we experienced in getting the proper services for our daughter? Please tell everyone.

After reading your posts, all I can do is quote the immortal words of James Tiberius Kirk: "Beam me up Scotty, there are no signs of intelligent life here."
Rick

And my advise to you is the same as to cloggy. Get out of your own little world,a nd look around you at the children who do not have the advantages that your daughter has. Have a little gratitude for the fact you have indeed, been lucky or blessed, and that there are still those kids out there that have not been as lucky. Those kids are still struggling. Do you not have an ounce of empathy for their plight, for the fact that they are being denied the very advantages that would allow them to function in a hearing world on their own terms. Is your life so self centered that you cannot see beyond what is in your little world? It s not about you, or your daughter, or your choices. It is about the deaf children that you have never even taken the time to get to know, nor do you obviously have the desire to know, as their needs make you extremely uncomfortable. To admit that not all deaf children are as successful as your daughter in an oral world is to be forced to admit that, yes, you have been lucky, because there are those parents who put just as much as you did into it and their kids to not make orally. And they can't figure out why, because people like you keep telling them all you have to do is make the effort, and put in the hard work. Why should those kids be marginalized, rick48? Because their parents didn't work as hard as you, or are they simply inferior because they can't acheive the same level of oral success that your daughter did? Explain those kids to me, rick. And explain to those parents, as well, what happened. Yes, you were lucky. You were lucky enought o have a diaughter that ws able to live up to your high expectations. You were lucky enough to have a wife, by your own admission, that did all the work while you stood around and touted the woderful successes "you" have achieved. You have been damned lucky. But until you realize that, you will continue to take all the credit for your child's achievements, and will never be able to see that YOU had nothing to do with it. You will never be able to see beyond you own nose to the kids and parents that work as hard, and most likely, even harder than you ever have, and still don't survive without additional skills. Look out in the world, rick48. Your daughter is not the only deaf kid out there.

 

[Cloggy]

Yes, it is a twisting of words, but perhaps you aren't grasping the nuances of semantics and pragmatics because English is not your native language.

Why the giggle? My English is fine, there's no reason to be rude.

You cannot comapre compare walking to auditory function, as one affects communication which means it impacts life functioning in an all encompassing way; there is not an area of an individuals life that is not affected by communication. Mobility issues, while having an negative impact on many of life's area, do not impact in the same way and as all encopassing (encompassing) way as does hearing loss and subsequent communication issues. Therefore, they are not comparable.

What a load of crap... The example is totally comparable... Natural ability to walk/hear.... so any work that is put into helping a child to walk/hear will cause bigger problems.... YOUR WORDS..

Secodnly(secondly), I have never said than nothing should be done to assist children with hearing loss or children with mobility issues. In fact, I advocate strongly for the use of all tools for the individual child. That means everything cloggy--not just one thing. You cannot impalnt (implant)a child with CI, and expect them to function as ahearing (a hearing) child simply because they have a surgicla (surgical) implant that artificially stimulates hearing.

SUre.... who said that? [/quote]

Nor can you leave a child to function sole with ASL skills alone and expect them to be successful. I gave my son what he needed, and he has excellent oral skills, as well as ASL skills. He was provided speech therapy, and he was provided the most poerful (powerfull) HA's available.

Don't tell me there was actual work involved.....

He CHOOSE to use sign as his preferred method of communication, and as he was provided the opportunity to affilitate (affiliate )with both the hearing world and the Deaf world, was able to make the decision for himself to ID as Deaf. He was provided the opportunity to make the comaprison (comparison) and decide where he was most comfortable. [Don't start taking an individual as an example.... You told me in another thread that's not what one is supposed to do....

Unless a child is provided the opportunity to be exposed to both they know only one, and therefore are unable to make a comparison. These are the children that end up having problems because they have only been permitted exposure to a hearing world where they are always, always percieved (perceived) as different, and therefore marginalized by the hearing world.

I think you're wrong.. that attitude is changing.... Sure it's there, but it's changing..... Ask some CI-users on AllDeaf....

No matter how great their oral skills are, and how proud their families may be, and how "normal" and hearing their families may perceive them to be, when they get out into the real world, they are perceived as not hearing. and different, and therefore, will be treated as such.

Another generalization - you shouldn't do that.
But I guess YOU see them as different. Not everyone does that.... and I'm not talking about CI-users that are 20 years of age that tried and failed... I'm talking about children growing up with CI.

All of a sudden, these kids are thrust into a world very different fromthe (from the) protected atmosphere provided by their parents, and they suffer because of it, because they have never been shown that there is another place for them where they aren't considered to be different, where their sameness of experience can be shared and understood. And yes, it affects their self esteem, their identity, and their mental and emotional health and well being.

"Thrust" into a world..... wrong perception again.... generalizing too much, you should stop that.... or are you allowed, and I am not?????

Your daughter is still young. I am talking about preparing these kids for the realities of life, not whether they can speak or whether they sign. I don't goive (give) a damn how they communicate--I care that they CAN communicate. I don't give a damn whether they are mainstreamed or whether they attend a deaf school, as long as they are provided ALL that they need in that educational environment.

Same here...

Where the difference of opinion comes in is that I have not seen that kids in the mainstream are provided with all they need to receive education equal to that of their hearing peers. THAT, my friend is what I object to. You are the one that has turned this into an issue of proCi or antiCI. (pro-CI or anti-CI)

WOW, what an accusation.... I didn't realise (realize)that... Gueaa (Guess) it must be my terrible English..

I am and always will be pro deaf child, whether than child is impanted, unaided, or HA. You on the other hand, have drawn the dividing line, and cannot see any further than the CI issue.

Ah, a new accusation... or assumption....

You are so busy extollong (extolling) the wonderful new miracle of science that you cannot see any further than your own nose and realize that there are still numerous children out there who do not, and never will, receive the same advantages as your daughter does, and these children still deserve every oportunity (opportunity) in life to succeed. Great for you and great for your daughter. I hope that you will continue to acheive (achieve) the same successes without any setbacks as she grows older. But, and this is a big BUT, there are parents out there who do not enjoy the same successes that you have, but they expect that is what they are supposed to receive, and therefore, do not recognize that their child is in need of more than is being provided. These are the kids that get so far behind that the mainstream schools finally agree to send them to a school for the deaf becasue (because) the mainstream no longer knows what to do with them. And then the schools for the deaf are blamed for low literacy rates, and second rate education. When the truth of the matter is, if these parents had opened their eyes and realized that there is more at stake than whether a child can speak as well as their hearing peers, they would never have fallen behaind (behind) to start with.

I know there are..... They should be educated.... now when are yo going to see, acknoledge (acknowledge) and respect parents that are not like your horror-parents...

My comments are not all addressed to you personally, or to rick48 either, for that matter. But neither one of you can break out of your own silly little worlds long enough to realize that there are concerns greater than the ones you have for yourselves. Just as I no longer worry about my son, as he has proven that he can be successful, and can compete in the hearing world on his own terms. I did my job with him, and I did it damned well, if I may say so myself. Now I am working with and for other deaf children, and I wish for them the same as I wished for my son. To be able to compete and be successful on their own terms, whatever those terms may be. I am no longer locked into the world as it only revolves around my son. He was the impetus for my becoming involved in assisting the children that still need assistance, because I saw far too many children going without the services they needed becasue (because) their parents had no idea what their needs were or how to address them. My son didn't need the assistance of an advocate--he had one. Me. But too many chioldren (children) don't have a parent that is capable of, or even wants to, serve as their advocate, and it is not right that these children should be provided a lesser opportunity because of that. But you have to look beyond your own little world to understand that cloggy. You speak of one child, I speak of deaf children.

You just spoke of your child.... but I guess for you that's OK...
You did a great job with him... Your choices worked... Excellent.... Do you think there's a slight possibility that another option would have worked as well???

You speak of your daughter, I reference my son, but speak of the numerous studnets (students) I am in contact with on a daily basis. You insist on keeping the focus on your child, and I am telling you that there are other children out there--look a little farther, cloggy, and perhaps you will begin to understand that you and your daughter both have been very lucky, very blessed.

Again, ridiculing our efforts. You could just as well have said that ONLY YOUR method works, and if someone else is successful, it's luck and blessings.... Thanks for the confidence...

Have a little gratitude for that blessing, and perhaps it will increase your tolerance and your empathy for those children who still struggle.

BTW... my English is fine..

 

[Boult]

Cloggy, the reason that she typed all those in a long block riddled with typos is because she was steamed as in pissed-off. you could tell... no paragraph breaks, spacing and such...

 

[shel90]

Why the giggle? My English is fine, there's no reason to be rude.


What a load of crap... The example is totally comparable... Natural ability to walk/hear.... so any work that is put into helping a child to walk/hear will cause bigger problems.... YOUR WORDS..
SUre.... who said that?

Don't tell me there was actual work involved.....

He CHOOSE to use sign as his preferred method of communication, and as he was provided the opportunity to affilitate (affiliate )with both the hearing world and the Deaf world, was able to make the decision for himself to ID as Deaf. He was provided the opportunity to make the comaprison (comparison) and decide where he was most comfortable. [Don't start taking an individual as an example.... You told me in another thread that's not what one is supposed to do....
I think you're wrong.. that attitude is changing.... Sure it's there, but it's changing..... Ask some CI-users on AllDeaf....
Another generalization - you shouldn't do that.
But I guess YOU see them as different. Not everyone does that.... and I'm not talking about CI-users that are 20 years of age that tried and failed... I'm talking about children growing up with CI.

I work with children who are growing up with CIs so I am talking about them too.
"Thrust" into a world..... wrong perception again.... generalizing too much, you should stop that.... or are you allowed, and I am not?????
Same here...
WOW, what an accusation.... I didn't realise (realize)that... Gueaa (Guess) it must be my terrible English..
Ah, a new accusation... or assumption....I know there are..... They should be educated.... now when are yo going to see, acknoledge (acknowledge) and respect parents that are not like your horror-parents...
You just spoke of your child.... but I guess for you that's OK...
You did a great job with him... Your choices worked... Excellent.... Do you think there's a slight possibility that another option would have worked as well???
Again, ridiculing our efforts. You could just as well have said that ONLY YOUR method works, and if someone else is successful, it's luck and blessings.... Thanks for the confidence...


How is she ridiculing your efforts? She hasnt criticized the efforts u have made with your daughter. Just asking you to understand where we are coming from just like u want us to understand where u come from It is a two way street.

BTW... my English is fine..

Jillo and I see that there are so many deaf people who struggle..hers with college aged people, mine with young children. I am sorry but it is still happening out there and we are here to educate people about it, not ridiculing your efforts. Why do u keep saying that?

 

[SJCSue]

And my advise to you is the same as to cloggy. Get out of your own little world,a nd look around you at the children who do not have the advantages that your daughter has. Have a little gratitude for the fact you have indeed, been lucky or blessed, and that there are still those kids out there that have not been as lucky. Those kids are still struggling. Do you not have an ounce of empathy for their plight, for the fact that they are being denied the very advantages that would allow them to function in a hearing world on their own terms. Is your life so self centered that you cannot see beyond what is in your little world? It s not about you, or your daughter, or your choices. It is about the deaf children that you have never even taken the time to get to know, nor do you obviously have the desire to know, as their needs make you extremely uncomfortable. To admit that not all deaf children are as successful as your daughter in an oral world is to be forced to admit that, yes, you have been lucky, because there are those parents who put just as much as you did into it and their kids to not make orally. And they can't figure out why, because people like you keep telling them all you have to do is make the effort, and put in the hard work. Why should those kids be marginalized, rick48? Because their parents didn't work as hard as you, or are they simply inferior because they can't acheive the same level of oral success that your daughter did? Explain those kids to me, rick. And explain to those parents, as well, what happened. Yes, you were lucky. You were lucky enought o have a diaughter that ws able to live up to your high expectations. You were lucky enough to have a wife, by your own admission, that did all the work while you stood around and touted the woderful successes "you" have achieved. You have been damned lucky. But until you realize that, you will continue to take all the credit for your child's achievements, and will never be able to see that YOU had nothing to do with it. You will never be able to see beyond you own nose to the kids and parents that work as hard, and most likely, even harder than you ever have, and still don't survive without additional skills. Look out in the world, rick48. Your daughter is not the only deaf kid out there.

Rick and Cloggy, did you ever read "Deaf Like Me"? The book was written by a father of a deaf daughter who was born deaf during the Rubella outbreak in the 1960's. Her parents try to rise orally until they realized she was not able to understand abstract concepts such as maybe. They also realized that she did not COMMUNICATE with her own parents when she was in the hospital. I suggest you read this book because it may open your eyes to what Jillio was saying.

 

[rick48]

And my advise to you is the same as to cloggy... Your daughter is not the only deaf kid out there.

Not playing your little games anymore. Take your condescending hysterical rant and go troll elsewhere. Don't need or want advice from you, I seek it only from those I respect. With you, I just consider the source.

 

[deafdyke]

but perhaps you aren't grasping the nuances of semantics and pragmatics because English is not your native language.

Cloggy, your English is very good, but you still make a lot of grammartical errors which make it obvious that English is a second language for you.
That's exactly the way it is for the majority of dhh kids. They tend to approach English (or other spoken language) as a second langauge. Even oral kids do.

Do you think there's a slight possibility that another option would have worked as well???

Cloggy, the difference between us and pro oralists is that we think that methodology should be child centered, and the child's choice. A lot of us, the other option worked, but we wish that we'd been able to chose to be able to have access to ALL options, rather then having oral only be the default, and sign just for oral failures. In fact, I know kids who for early intervention were taught how to sign AND how to speak. Guess what? Some of them actually decided to DROP the sign *gasp* We're more about being anti oral only as the default. Oral kids have not historically suceeded all that well. Yes, there have been some high acheivers, but maybe its time to give up the infighting and work more on giving dhh kids a FULL toolbox, so THEY can choose which tools THEY want to use. Why is that so wrong? We simply think that by hyperfocusing on one aspect of the toolbox,that other areas get cheated out. Also how the heck does a dhh kid develop good self esteem, when people are constantly correcting their speech or thinking they're retarded b/c of their voices? Why hyperfocus on such a weak area?
I'm also involved in the disabilty rights movements. As a matter of fact, my best friend is a very hardcore Blind rights(he is blind hoh) activist. There are a lot of the same debates over methodology and schooling. But the end result should be a full toolbox. Kevin says that he wishes he'd been able to learn Braille and attend a school for the blind to create a foundation for sucess. He really feels that he could have done better if he'd had access to a full toolbox. Then again, in the physically disabled world there's hyperfocus on getting EVERYONE to walk. There's a real stigma about using a wheelchair. Matter of fact, my best friend who has clubfoot, arthirtitis, and moderate hypotonia is so goddamn stubborn about using a chair b/c "OH NO! She'll *gasp* appear disabled!" No matter that she can do more stuff and get around easier using a chair, she's still really bought into the myth that using "speshal needs" equptment makes you "dependant" on it.
My ex friend JT is very simalir as well. He uses a walker, and both manual and electronic chair. He's also bought into the myth that using a wheelchair makes you wheelchair bound.

.and I'm not talking about CI-users that are 20 years of age that tried and failed... I'm talking about children growing up with CI.

Yes, but not all "older kids" with CI are failures..........not all of them were oral failures. Many of them did quite well with CI. As a matter of fact, there've always been a significent minority of deaf kids who are functionally hoh with HEARING AIDS. MANY of us grew up "almost hearing"
Matter of fact, I never had a lot of the language problems that most dhh kids do. I have a VERY high (even for hearing) VERBAL IQ. I got 660 on my verbal SATs. Yet, even thou I could hear really well with my aids, and had a pretty good handle on English, that did not totally equalize me!

These are the children that end up having problems because they have only been permitted exposure to a hearing world where they are always, always percieved (perceived) as different, and therefore marginalized by the hearing world.

I think you're wrong.. that attitude is changing.... Sure it's there, but it's changing..... Ask some CI-users on AllDeaf....

Um the CI doesn't allow a dhh kid to be 100% a part of the hearing world. They are essentially like the last generation of really good hearing aid users. Those kids didn't do any better in the area of having 100% access to the hearing world.
Cloggy, MANY of us experianced what oral CI kids of today are experiancing. Oralism is NOT NEW. Neither are oral sucesses.........there have ALWAYS been oral sucesses, including back in AG Bell's day, pre ANY type of hearing technology!

 

[Cloggy]

Cloggy, the reason that she typed all those in a long block riddled with typos is because she was steamed as in pissed-off. you could tell... no paragraph breaks, spacing and such...

I know....

Actually, she started off "giggling..."

 

[Cloggy]

Cloggy, your English is very good, but you still make a lot of grammartical (grammatical) errors which make (makes) it obvious that English is a second language for you.
That's exactly the way it is for the majority of dhh kids. They tend to approach English (or other spoken language) as a second langauge (language). Even oral kids do. ......

My reaction was on accusing me not understanding what has been written, and then patronizing it with "but it's your second language..."

Sure I make mistakes. You do as well, everyone does, since we hardly read back.... or correct it after we posted it...
That's where grammatical errors come from.

But patronising (the english spelling, as opposed to patronizing - the usa-spelling) my knowledge of English; there's no need for that.

 

[deafdyke]

Cloggy, I'm not talking about misspelling words. God, I suck at that and I'm an editor type. It's more you can tell by your syntax(way sentances are constructed) and grammar usage that you learned English as a second language. It's pretty good, don't get me wrong......but, it is kind of obvious that you're not as fluent in English as you are in your native language.
It's like, you can articualte yourself pretty well in English, but you wouldn't be able to write an upper high school/ college level paper in English. There's still a bit of awkwardness with English syntax that's noticable.......but then again, MANY people here have that awkwardness.

Nope. Speech and language therapy is a service provided for in a child's IEP and not a course of study but why let the facts get in the way of your bizarre points?

Rick, it's not a course of formal study,(ie learning about history) but kids are formally taught, and taught using a curriculm. So in a way they DO have a "course of study"...............they don't formally graduate from the course of study, but its like "graduating" from nursery school.