The Deaf Community

HHIssues said:
And many of the deaf are choosing the CI route for themselves. Even some of the culturally deaf...
Click to expand...

That's because that's a decision they made for themselves. I know -- I considered one myself. I went through the entire process and stopped short at the ENT/MRI stage because visits with my CI audi determined I would not get enough benefit out of it that I already don't get with my HAs. I shared my journey with that process on this forum 2 years ago, including test results that showed what I just said. Anyhow, I've been deaf since birth, been fully immersed in ASL, the deaf culture, learned to speak, etc. and I still considered a CI. It is the same for the others who chose a CI for themselves. I wouldn't have dropped deaf friends, wouldn't have stopped using ASL. It is all a part of my life.

So, what is your point about those choosing the CI route for themselves?
 
AlleyCat said:
That's because that's a decision they made for themselves. I know -- I considered one myself. I went through the entire process and stopped short at the ENT/MRI stage because visits with my CI audi determined I would not get enough benefit out of it that I already don't get with my HAs. I shared my journey with that process on this forum 2 years ago, including test results that showed what I just said. Anyhow, I've been deaf since birth, been fully immersed in ASL, the deaf culture, learned to speak, etc. and I still considered a CI. It is the same for the others who chose a CI for themselves. I wouldn't have dropped deaf friends, wouldn't have stopped using ASL. It is all a part of my life.

So, what is your point about those choosing the CI route for themselves?
Click to expand...

Same here. Several years ago my family was encouraging me to get a CI, so I went through the whole process and was assured I was an ideal candidate. I saw a few audiologists, listened to their pitches, and in the end decided that my hearing aids did the job well enough for me. My family accepted my decision, which was wise on their part, lol. I now live in a town with a strong deaf community, and there are only a few with CI's. It turns out that those with the CI's are split--half are satisfied with it while the other half complain that it did not meet their expectations. So, I have no regrets. I LOVE the sound of silence and the music it makes! :)
 
AlleyCat said:
That's because that's a decision they made for themselves. I know -- I considered one myself. I went through the entire process and stopped short at the ENT/MRI stage because visits with my CI audi determined I would not get enough benefit out of it that I already don't get with my HAs. I shared my journey with that process on this forum 2 years ago, including test results that showed what I just said. Anyhow, I've been deaf since birth, been fully immersed in ASL, the deaf culture, learned to speak, etc. and I still considered a CI. It is the same for the others who chose a CI for themselves. I wouldn't have dropped deaf friends, wouldn't have stopped using ASL. It is all a part of my life.

So, what is your point about those choosing the CI route for themselves?
Click to expand...

Alley Cat, I believe this too -- I don't see that accepting, considering, or even choosing a CI is in any way a repudiation to being Deaf, of using ASL, of identifying as deaf.

[update: just want to clarify the "I believe this too" part in that I'm agreeing with you, AlleyCat]
 
Last edited:
GrendelQ said:
Alley Cat, I believe this too -- I don't see that accepting, considering, or even choosing a CI is in any way a repudiation to being Deaf, of using ASL, of identifying as deaf.
Click to expand...

Do you see ci's as in doctors profiting off the deaf?

Like I said... Gotta walk in our shoes... :)
 
Buffalo said:
Maybe the late deafened don't need to learn sign language if they decided on CI. The young deaf babies and kids sure do need ASL. They need to be able to develop a language.
Click to expand...

I think that's a big maybe. Even though someone may go most of their lives hearing and retain auditory memory after a loss, they'd still need to learn sign to communicate. You just can't snap a finger and be implanted in a blink of an eye. The process is probably much the same as it is for infants. A person must qualify for a CI. What if that person's loss doesn't? Then, what? I think ASL can benefit the late deafened individual as well. Whether they choose that route, though, is up to them.
 
Oceanbreeze said:
I think that's a big maybe. Even though someone may go most of their lives hearing and retain auditory memory after a loss, they'd still need to learn sign to communicate. You just can't snap a finger and be implanted in a blink of an eye. The process is probably much the same as it is for infants. A person must qualify for a CI. What if that person's loss doesn't? Then, what? I think ASL can benefit the late deafened individual as well. Whether they choose that route, though, is up to them.
Click to expand...
Again, what's with you talking as if you know it all? And again, what's with you promoting ASL? What is it to you? You even said it yourself that you're not even that fluent in it?

How would you feel if someone that doesn't use a wheelchair comes across acting like he or she knows it all on what should be the solution for all those that does use a wheelchair?
 
HHIssues said:
Again, what's with you talking as if you know it all? And again, what's with you promoting ASL? What is it to you? You even said it yourself that you're not even that fluent in it?

How would you feel if someone that doesn't use a wheelchair comes across acting like he or she knows it all on what should be the solution for all those that does use a wheelchair?
Click to expand...

Why the defensiveness?
 
Wirelessly posted

HHIssues said:
Again, what's with you talking as if you know it all? And again, what's with you promoting ASL? What is it to you? You even said it yourself that you're not even that fluent in it?

How would you feel if someone that doesn't use a wheelchair comes across acting like he or she knows it all on what should be the solution for all those that does use a wheelchair?
Click to expand...

Are you talking about me? :wave:


I remember I got into hot water for that for trying to help a person getting into wheelchair sports when I didn't know the person's conditions. :laugh2:
 
Last edited:
Bebonang said:
That is why I put my signature underline which indicate that it is still awesome to be deaf as I am glad that I don't have to follow with their hearing environment every time the hearing person make expression like almost close their eyes and kind of cower their shoulder that the noises is too much to bear and they can not stand the noises. SILENCE IS GOLDEN. Deafness is a lot better than hearing. :cool2:
Click to expand...

Why is this ok to say? Why isn't anyone saying that this is reverse audism??
 
posts from hell said:
Do you see ci's as in doctors profiting off the deaf?

Like I said... Gotta walk in our shoes... :)
Click to expand...

Now, that is something I don't know about. I'm sure there is kick-backs somewhere, but, I don't think that's any reason to be against the CI. Here's why I say that....

Dr's get a kick back from the pharmaceutical companies every time they prescribe a med for someone. Unfortunately, it happens within the medical community. I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, but, I'm also not sure it's a valid reason against implantation. I'm still thinking on that one.

We CAN agree on this, though. The medical establishment is corrupt. I cited the pharmaceutical example. I'm sure people can come up with more examples if they looked into it and dug deep enough.
 
HHIssues said:
Again, what's with you talking as if you know it all? And again, what's with you promoting ASL? What is it to you? You even said it yourself that you're not even that fluent in it?

How would you feel if someone that doesn't use a wheelchair comes across acting like he or she knows it all on what should be the solution for all those that does use a wheelchair?
Click to expand...

She is promoted BOTH ASL and spoken English. Is that hard to understand? What's wrong with exposing all children to both anyway. Will it kill them?
 
shel90 said:
She is promoted BOTH ASL and spoken English. Is that hard to understand? What's wrong with exposing all children to both anyway. Will it kill them?
Click to expand...

Thank you, Shel. I've beat the drum for ASL, because, it needs to be put out there. Spoken language seems to be the "default" hearing parents will go to when bringing up a deaf baby because of the advice they receive from the medical community. However, yes, I promote both ASL and spoken English.

I don't get why people are all torqued out about my viewpoints. Well, I DO get it, but we won't go there again. It's already been said and resaid.

And, I'll say yet again....


I'm for:

1. ASL (or hell, lets just say sign if it will make people feel better! ASL, PSE, SEE, whatever...I'm for it!)
2. A full toolbox approach (spoken language, sign language, ect).
3.Cochlear implants.

I'm against:

ORAL ONLY! Period.

And, to answer your question. No, it won't. What will hold a child back is a language delay. Also, what happens IF the cochlear implant doesn't work or the kid isn't a candidate for the CI?.

The CI works for the majority, but it doesn't work for all. There will always be someone the CI doesn't work for. Then, what is that person supposed to do? They probably will learn to sign, right? The problem is, time has passed and it becomes harder to learn a language as time goes on. So, why not just learn ASL from the jump and get a head of the curve?
 
Oceanbreeze said:
Thank you, Shel. I've beat the drum for ASL, because, it needs to be put out there. Spoken language seems to be the "default" hearing parents will go to when bringing up a deaf baby because of the advice they receive from the medical community. However, yes, I promote both ASL and spoken English.

I don't get why people are all torqued out about my viewpoints. Well, I DO get it, but we won't go there again. It's already been said and resaid.

And, I'll say yet again....


I'm for:

1. ASL (or hell, lets just say sign if it will make people feel better! ASL, PSE, SEE, whatever...I'm for it!)
2. A full toolbox approach (spoken language, sign language, ect).
3.Cochlear implants.

I'm against:

ORAL ONLY! Period.

And, to answer your question. No, it won't. What will hold a child back is a language delay. Also, what happens IF the cochlear implant doesn't work or the kid isn't a candidate for the CI?.

The CI works for the majority, but it doesn't work for all. There will always be someone the CI doesn't work for. Then, what is that person supposed to do? They probably will learn to sign, right? The problem is, time has passed and it becomes harder to learn a language as time goes on. So, why not just learn ASL from the jump and get a head of the curve?
Click to expand...

And it is those kids I see...and it is not a small number. It is hundreds. Why should they be punished jsut because some kids were successful orally? No excuse in the world will ever convince me.
 
Oceanbreeze said:
Thank you, Shel. I've beat the drum for ASL, because, it needs to be put out there. Spoken language seems to be the "default" hearing parents will go to when bringing up a deaf baby because of the advice they receive from the medical community. However, yes, I promote both ASL and spoken English.

I don't get why people are all torqued out about my viewpoints. Well, I DO get it, but we won't go there again. It's already been said and resaid.

And, I'll say yet again....


I'm for:

1. ASL (or hell, lets just say sign if it will make people feel better! ASL, PSE, SEE, whatever...I'm for it!)
2. A full toolbox approach (spoken language, sign language, ect).
3.Cochlear implants.

I'm against:

ORAL ONLY! Period.

And, to answer your question. No, it won't. What will hold a child back is a language delay. Also, what happens IF the cochlear implant doesn't work or the kid isn't a candidate for the CI?.

The CI works for the majority, but it doesn't work for all. There will always be someone the CI doesn't work for. Then, what is that person supposed to do? They probably will learn to sign, right? The problem is, time has passed and it becomes harder to learn a language as time goes on. So, why not just learn ASL from the jump and get a head of the curve?
Click to expand...

I guess my question is: why do you have an opinion at all? If you are not deaf, Deaf, or have Deaf family, or a deaf child, why do you think you know enough to have an opinion about the subject?
 
faire_jour said:
I guess my question is: why do you have an opinion at all? If you are not deaf, Deaf, or have Deaf family, or a deaf child, why do you think you know enough to have an opinion about the subject?
Click to expand...

I think that is the main problem OB faces here. Most deaf people have had far too many opinions and orders from hearing people running their lives for years.

The majority of TOD's, ENT's, and audiologists are not deaf nor have deaf family.
 
faire_jour said:
I guess my question is: why do you have an opinion at all? If you are not deaf, Deaf, or have Deaf family, or a deaf child, why do you think you know enough to have an opinion about the subject?
Click to expand...

Because she listens to us.
 
Bottesini said:
I think that is the main problem OB faces here. Most deaf people have had far too many opinions and orders from hearing people running their lives for years.

The majority of TOD's, ENT's, and audiologists are not deaf nor have deaf family.
Click to expand...

And I would never listen to an audiologist's opinion about anything to do with deafness except for the technical sceince of measuring hearing loss and fitting amplification.
 
faire_jour said:
And I would never listen to an audiologist's opinion about anything to do with deafness except for the technical sceince of measuring hearing loss and fitting amplification.
Click to expand...

Nor should you. Anything else is not their business.
 
Back
Top