use of device in children or not

[jag]

I was reading sweetminds posts and came across this particular paragraph :

" If a child relies on the auditory device and then it suddenly isn’t working anymore, then it is something that they have no choice but to have taken from them. These surgeries are not inexpensive. It takes money to maintain these devices and not all people are able to keep up with this. What happens when a child decides that they do not want to utilize this technology.
"

I see some people agreed with her statements here. first I'll address "If a child relies on the auditory device and then it suddenly isn’t working anymore, then it is something that they have no choice but to have taken from them."


lets change it alittle, if a child relies on hearing and then it is suddenly gone, then it is something they have no choice but to have taken from them.

at least if it's a device it can be replaced more easily then if deafness suddenly occurs. the deaf child still has times of no sound so would at least have knowledge of it.

"These surgeries are not inexpensive. It takes money to maintain these devices and not all people are able to keep up with this. What happens when a child decides that they do not want to utilize this technology"

It really is a parents choice as to what they choose to spend THEIR money on. While insurance covers some of the device replacements and batteries and repairs are a parents resposibility and they've made the choice. The money involved is either from thier insurnace company or from their own pocket...and isn't anyone in the deaf communities to dispose of.

Now on with the discussion if you want.

 

[Audiofuzzy]

That is why it is important to keep deaf culture along with hearing one, and teach ASL along with speech.

Fuzzy

 

[sr171soars]

I was reading sweetminds posts and came across this particular paragraph :

" If a child relies on the auditory device and then it suddenly isn’t working anymore, then it is something that they have no choice but to have taken from them. These surgeries are not inexpensive. It takes money to maintain these devices and not all people are able to keep up with this. What happens when a child decides that they do not want to utilize this technology.
"

I see some people agreed with her statements here. first I'll address "If a child relies on the auditory device and then it suddenly isn’t working anymore, then it is something that they have no choice but to have taken from them."


lets change it alittle, if a child relies on hearing and then it is suddenly gone, then it is something they have no choice but to have taken from them.

at least if it's a device it can be replaced more easily then if deafness suddenly occurs. the deaf child still has times of no sound so would at least have knowledge of it.

"These surgeries are not inexpensive. It takes money to maintain these devices and not all people are able to keep up with this. What happens when a child decides that they do not want to utilize this technology"

It really is a parents choice as to what they choose to spend THEIR money on. While insurance covers some of the device replacements and batteries and repairs are a parents resposibility and they've made the choice. The money involved is either from thier insurnace company or from their own pocket...and isn't anyone in the deaf communities to dispose of.

Now on with the discussion if you want.

Ummm....

The first point if it is not working anymore... I will assume we are talking about the implant itself not the processor. The processor will be covered under warranty for three years (assume Cochlear Inc CI) and after that, one can get a maintenance agreement (insurance) to cover it. So, that shouldn't be an issue. If I recall for the implant itself, it is covered for a lifetime and the company will assist in reimplanting one. Now, in the rare case (it is a small percentage) for whatever reason, the implant won't work period and a reimplantation won't work, then the issue becomes relevant. Life happens and there are no guarantees and as long as the child was learning a language if not more (i.e., verbal and sign), then the child could adjust to the new reality. So, we are talking about worst case scenarios which do not happen that often...

As for the second point if a child later on decides not to use the CI especially when of age (i.e., 18), it is a moot point. What the parents do with their money is their choice as you (jag) stated, no more no less. At least, in this case, the parents can't be accused of doing nothing for the child. They were doing what they thought was best. Some will be thankful and grateful their parents cared enough to give them opportunities in life with more tools. For those children who decided to forget it and go a different direction is perfectly fine as well. It is not a perfect world and the "nothing ventured nothing gained principle" is always valid no matter what the outcome.

My two cents...

 

[jag]

Ummm....

If I recall for the implant itself, it is covered for a lifetime and the company will assist in reimplanting one.

Some will be thankful and grateful their parents cared enough to give them opportunities in life with more tools. For those children who decided to forget it and go a different direction is perfectly fine as well. It is not a perfect world and the "nothing ventured nothing gained principle" is always valid no matter what the outcome.

My two cents...

Did some snipping of the post but anyway I should remember how long they told me the internal was covered for....CRS ya know...comes more often when you get over 40 .

Actually I agree that once the child becomes a young adult the choice to use the implant of not is his/hers. At least the parents have done their job and helped him to learn to learn a form of communication in a hearing world, a form which will stay with him even if the device isn't used. And my guess is many will go back to their devices once they're done with their rebellious period.

I guess I'd like to hear from some of those who's agrument is against early implantation to. Not rants, but arguments showing that it's not a positive things, facts that back up not implanting early, we already have facts showing that the successrate is greater at an earlier age.

Nothing ventured nothing gained....and i forgot to buy a lottery ticket again....so I guess i'll never make that gain.

 

[kayla123]

Good point you two, People seem to forget the fact that it the parents money, the parents child, and the parents decision.

 

[Foxrac]

Yea, it's up to their parents but I just can encourage them to make sure before get CI because some deaf children can get good benefits with HA.

If I have deaf children then I wouldn't let them to get CI but I would make them to wear HA because I want them to become great football player in future without any problem with helmet.

Well, I don't need them because I'm proud be gay and single, also love to socialize with other men, also women as friend.

 

[neecy]

Yea, it's up to their parents but I just can encourage them to make sure before get CI because some deaf children can get good benefits with HA.

If I have deaf children then I wouldn't let them to get CI but I would make them to wear HA because I want them to become great football player in future without any problem with helmet.

Well, I don't need them because I'm proud be gay and single, also love to socialize with other men, also women as friend.

Well, if a child gets a benefit from a HA, they WON'T be implanted with a CI anyway, so that's a moot point.

As to the football idea - are you saying that you'd demand that a child of yours become a football player?

 

[kayla123]

Yea, it's up to their parents but I just can encourage them to make sure before get CI because some deaf children can get good benefits with HA.

If I have deaf children then I wouldn't let them to get CI but I would make them to wear HA because I want them to become great football player in future without any problem with helmet.

Well, I don't need them because I'm proud be gay and single, also love to socialize with other men, also women as friend.

Like Neecy said, if they benefit from HAs then there is no need for the CI. In most if not all cases if the deafness is profound, then there will be very little benefit with the HAs. The audiologist will first start with HAs and then go from there.

 

[Boult]

Did some snipping of the post but anyway I should remember how long they told me the internal was covered for....CRS ya know...comes more often when you get over 40 .

Actually I agree that once the child becomes a young adult the choice to use the implant of not is his/hers. At least the parents have done their job and helped him to learn to learn a form of communication in a hearing world, a form which will stay with him even if the device isn't used. And my guess is many will go back to their devices once they're done with their rebellious period.

I guess I'd like to hear from some of those who's agrument is against early implantation to. Not rants, but arguments showing that it's not a positive things, facts that back up not implanting early, we already have facts showing that the successrate is greater at an earlier age.

Nothing ventured nothing gained....and i forgot to buy a lottery ticket again....so I guess i'll never make that gain.

Yeah the most common among those makers are that the internal implants are covered for 10 yrs under warranty. but the usage may be lifetime though..

hope that helps

 

[Foxrac]

Well, if a child gets a benefit from a HA, they WON'T be implanted with a CI anyway, so that's a moot point.

As to the football idea - are you saying that you'd demand that a child of yours become a football player?

Yea, of course... Football is #1 sports in USA...

 

[Boult]

volcomskatz,

They made good points and I agree that If your future child benefit from HA then getting a CI is moot point.

 

[Audiofuzzy]

Yea, of course... Football is #1 sports in USA...

What if you have a girl ??

Fuzzy

 

[Foxrac]

volcomskatz,

They made good points and I agree that If your future child benefit from HA then getting a CI is moot point.

Excuse me, you can't force what I doing with my deaf children.

I just make them to wear HA, that all.

 

[Foxrac]

What if you have a girl ??

Fuzzy

Same thing but different activities.

 

[Boult]

Excuse me, you can't force what I doing with my deaf children.

I just make them to wear HA, that all.

What make you think I was forcing you? Do you understand what I was saying recently? Why does my sentence looks like I am forcing you?

 

[Foxrac]

What make you think I was forcing you? Do you understand what I was saying recently? Why does my sentence looks like I am forcing you?

I'm confused what your sentence said... What's moot?

 

[Boult]

I'm confused what your sentence said... What's moot?

I am second person to use that word! I am surprised that you decide to pick on me instead of the first one?

Don't you have a dictionary? or look up dictionary online? it won't take long to learn that word

 

[neecy]

Excuse me, you can't force what I doing with my deaf children.

I just make them to wear HA, that all.

You are making no sense. If a child benefits from a HA, they WON'T implant a CI anyway. Where is anybody forcing anything?

 

[neecy]

Yea, of course... Football is #1 sports in USA...

but what if you have a boy that doesn't WANT to play football, and instead wants to play tennis or something like that?

 

[Foxrac]

but what if you have a boy that doesn't WANT to play football, and instead wants to play tennis or something like that?

You don't know that most men in USA love football, it get great influence.