The difference in technology to help the deaf children hear, then and now

K

kayla123

New Member
Joined
May 24, 2006
Messages
186
Reaction score
0
I am starting this thread because i came across a few posts that stated how even though a deaf person aquires language, they still have a hard time comprehending things. From what i read of peoples own experiences, i can understand why people get frustrated with parents decisions to choose the oral method only. I pointed this out in another thread, a lot of people who decided to get an CI after having HAs for so many years, noticed they heard a lot more stuff then they did with HAs alone. I know you all know that a lot has changed in technology in the past 20 years. The CI today along with therapy and depending how early a child is implanted is a lot different now then it was 20 years ago. The amount of hearing a child gains with the CI today is far more advanced then it used to be. Obviously, the CI is'nt a cure and the device itself is'nt enough but along with therapy and lots of patience and hard work, it's amazing how much it can help a child today to not only aquire good speech but to also comprehend it.The better the hearing, and the earlier, the easier time the child will have adapting. Please don't misunderstand me by thinking i choose the oral method only because i don't. I just wanted to make this thread so people can understand why some parents (actually i should say "why i" because i can't speak for other parents) choose to implant early.
 
I'll add tha comment that nowaday's - deafness has become a choice.
 
Cloggy said:
I'll add tha comment that nowaday's - deafness has become a choice.
Click to expand...

You're full of crap. Did you even read the origonal post on this thread?

What you and many many people fail to realize is that if a child gets a CI they are still deaf. If you're talking about wether or not some one is part of Deaf culture, then yes, that's a choice, but it's always a choice. It has nothing to do with cochlear implants.
 
:io:
We made a choice. That's what the topic is about. Our child is deaf. She can hear.
 
Last edited:
farmerjoe said:
You're full of crap. Did you even read the origonal post on this thread?

What you and many many people fail to realize is that if a child gets a CI they are still deaf. If you're talking about wether or not some one is part of Deaf culture, then yes, that's a choice, but it's always a choice. It has nothing to do with cochlear implants.
Click to expand...

It's not true, there's most deaf children get good benefits with CI, also unlike HA. I have no benefits with HA but CI helps me alot and can hear in rest of dbs. I believe about CI isn't affect deaf culture in USA but Europe have multi-language then CI can helps them to use multi-language without any confused with sign language. How are you expected if HA will work on all children?
 
Interesting information from my cousin's wife!!!!!!

She works with deaf babies, deaf children and deaf adults related to cochlear implants. She told me that many parents are disappointed that their teenagers aren't interested in hearing so they removed the magnets. Those teenagers got the CI when they were very little.

I asked her about the long term and she said she still doesn't know the answers and it is very risky for parents to make the decisions for their children.

She told me that her biggest concerns are the long term AND serious injury.

She shared with me more info from what she learned about the CI itself and good and bad news about CI.

I asked her what IFFFFFF her child is deaf, will she get her child the CI? She said no. I was really shocked to hear that!! That is her opinion and feelings and also, she saw many results from people who had problems.

I told her about my deaf friend who had CI and CI almost killed her by leakage while she was on the plane. She said that she knows about this kind of situation and it is very scary to experience that. My friend adviced to all deaf people NOT to get the CI to play it safe!

I am sorry that I still don't like the CI. CI is still too invasive. My cousin's wife said that having a CI is still really dangerous.

Momoftwo
 
there's most deaf children get good benefits with CI
Click to expand...
Define good benifit. Like how many are functionally hoh with the CI? The benifit is just so scattered, especially with prelingals who got poor benifit from hearing aids. (note.....most kids get significent benifit from hearing aids, and the research indicates that kids can hear better with the CI if they heard normally at one time. Kids who were born deaf make up only about 10% of the dhh population)
that stated how even though a deaf person aquires language, they still have a hard time comprehending things.
Click to expand...
Kayla123, the gross majority of dhh kids tend not to have the meat and potatos of spoken language. Like their verbal IQs are lower, and it's common for oral kids to say stuff like " How many spiders have legs?" rather then "How many legs do spiders have?"
 
Cloggy said:
:io:
We made a choice. That's what the topic is about. Our child is deaf. She can hear.
Click to expand...

It may sound like a contradiction, but it isn't. Not all deaf people are stone deaf. There are quite an astonishing diversity of hearing losses in the deaf-and-hard-of-hearing population. Some can hear well enough to talk on the telephone and communicate with hearing people directly. Yet they are deaf in the audiological sense that they do not have normal hearing that would not interfere with their ability to develop speech or acquire language at a normal rate without technological assistance and rehabilitation. And they are also Deaf in the cultural sense that they do not perceive themselves as broken ears but reimagine themselves as a unique cultural and linguistic minority with a shared history of oppression and empowerment.

Cloggy would be contradicting himself, had he said that something like: "Our child is not deaf. She can hear," or "Our child can hear. She is not deaf."

That's my interpretation.
 
deafdyke said:
Define good benifit. Like how many are functionally hoh with the CI? The benifit is just so scattered, especially with prelingals who got poor benifit from hearing aids. (note.....most kids get significent benifit from hearing aids, and the research indicates that kids can hear better with the CI if they heard normally at one time. Kids who were born deaf make up only about 10% of the dhh population)
Click to expand...

Do you have a link to any research that shows that the outcome of using a CI for a profoundly deaf child is scattered regardless of the age they were implanted? I assume that is what you mean?

As I understand it the benefit is scattered mostly due to age of implantation and severity of the hearing loss working together but wondered if you have access to information where it precludes age of implantation.
 
Do you have a link to any research that shows that the outcome of using a CI for a profoundly deaf child is scattered regardless of the age they were implanted? I assume that is what you mean?

As I understand it the benefit is scattered mostly due to age of implantation and severity of the hearing loss working together but wondered if you have access to information where it precludes age of implantation
Click to expand...
Nope......but I mean I do know that even over at HE, they admit that the end hearing result is scattered for like virtually EVERYONE, and not everyone acheives hoh listening levels, even with early implantation. Results are just so mixed for everyone, that it's hard to say what the direct cause is.
 
deafdyke said:
Nope......but I mean I do know that even over at HE, they admit that the end hearing result is scattered for like virtually EVERYONE, and not everyone acheives hoh listening levels, even with early implantation. Results are just so mixed for everyone, that it's hard to say what the direct cause is.
Click to expand...

Yeah well nothing is ever 100% in life especially when it comes to parenting.
 
Momoftwo said:
Interesting information from my cousin's wife!!!!!!



I told her about my deaf friend who had CI and CI almost killed her by leakage while she was on the plane. She said that she knows about this kind of situation and it is very scary to experience that. My friend adviced to all deaf people NOT to get the CI to play it safe!

I am sorry that I still don't like the CI. CI is still too invasive. My cousin's wife said that having a CI is still really dangerous.

Momoftwo
Click to expand...


what exactly is the implant supposed to have leaked? the power source is outside the head and the batteries would be the most likely source of leakage. the part under the skin and the electrode array does carry the electronics and i suppose could 'leak' if the covering is damaged. This example would be in the 1 in 10000 failures that my dr. decribed I would imagine. The do let you know there ARE risks.

Nothing in life is perfect, we don't live in a perfect world, so if I had a child who needed assistance to hear in a hearing world and the CI is available I would probably go through with giving the child the oppertunity while very young. I would take the stories of your cousin's wife to be the rumers that can be spread to scare the crap out of people when it is really a fairly safe procedure.
 
Yeah I'm getting tired of people writing hearsay and gossip that we can't even check out the truth or facts of. Can people just stick to facts and preferably cite independent controlled studies before making such claims?
 
Agreed...what could possibly leak internally?

Hearsay is hearsay...people find is soooo much easier to believe unverified information than try to discover the facts... :whistle:

It reminds me of a Monty Python movie (can't remember which one) where a character claimed that "he was turned into a Newt". The other characters in the movie just turned and looked at him skeptically and he whined "Well I was!"
 
From what I undy end hearing results are just like hearing aids. Some people can acheive hoh listening levels and others can only acheive background noise listening levels, and others everything in between.....that's all I meant.
 
Fact- my daughter is profound in both ears.
Fact- 10 months after C.I. surgery she hears at 20 db across the board in right ear.
Fact- we are fighting the ins co to get the left ear implanted.
Fact my profoundly deaf 2 1/2 year old daughter hears better than I do ( I have a very slight hearing loss due to military).
Fact- her speech is "progressing at in incredible rate". (that is an exact quote
from her speech pathologist).
I have taken all of the risks/horror stories in consideration. I still feel getting the other ear implanted is the best option for my daughter. So that is what we will do.

In my line of work (policeman) I deal in "facts and circumstances which would lead a reasonable person to believe" that something occured.
I hear a bunch of horror stories about C.I, but no one has been able to produce any evidence which would lead a reasonable person to believe that the MODERN C.I. is dangerous or responsible for all of the horror stories. If you do not like the C.I. fine, thats your opinion. Explain why you feel that way and leave it at that. Of course if you have information based in fact, please provide it. But please provide verification.
If someone has to embelish a story to convey a thought or opinion, the opinion is weak. Provide proof to support your opinion, not stories.

Alot of the horror stories about C.I. sound alot like the teen horror stories, just that, stories.
 
farmerjoe said:
You're full of crap. Did you even read the origonal post on this thread?

What you and many many people fail to realize is that if a child gets a CI they are still deaf. If you're talking about wether or not some one is part of Deaf culture, then yes, that's a choice, but it's always a choice. It has nothing to do with cochlear implants.
Click to expand...
:gpost:


I'm just wondering why most parents seem to think they have to make deaf children hear instead of leaving them alone. There have been many successful deaf adults out there. It seems nobody cares about it. (The book Great Deaf Americans has the stories of several of them.)
 
R2D2 said:
Do you have a link to any research that shows that the outcome of using a CI for a profoundly deaf child is scattered regardless of the age they were implanted? I assume that is what you mean?

As I understand it the benefit is scattered mostly due to age of implantation and severity of the hearing loss working together but wondered if you have access to information where it precludes age of implantation.
Click to expand...
Look who's talking--the article linked to in your sig is full of unfounded lies about Deaf culture and cochlear implants.
 
gnulinuxman said:
Look who's talking--the article linked to in your sig is full of unfounded lies about Deaf culture and cochlear implants.
Click to expand...

So why is it that so many of these so called unfounded lies are frequently repeated on AD? No one here has to agree with CIs or has to get one, but the very miminum they can do is have their facts straight.

Moreover, the article is not written by any organisation connected with CIs, but an organisation serving deaf people that promotes everyone's best interests.
 
Back
Top