Whats so wrong with CI????

L

Loomis

New Member
Joined
Apr 6, 2004
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Hello,

My name is John and I am deaf. My son was born deaf as well and we chose to have him implanted. Some of you may be up in arms but that is crazy. I want to give Frank every oppertunity that I didnt have. Some of you people say "ci makes kids think they are broken". Newsflash.........THEY ARE!!! We all are!! Being deaf isnt a blessing. We use that as a way to hide from the fact that we are not perfect. Well noone is perfect and it took me a long time to realize being deaf is far from a blessing. We look like a damn cult to the outside world and I refuse to have my son grow up that way. Yes he will always be deaf but with his ci a whole new world has been opened up to him. And I dread to think that I possibly could have been so selfish and insacue to keep him from that.
 
:bowdown: :bowdown:

I understand... that's your own decision. I do not complain about this C.I. I can't do get C.I. in my life because I had middle ear infection. I do not want to increase the pains.

You want yourself and your own family be happy. :) Good Luck!!! Up to you. Be Happy!!!
 
Hello Loomis, I am curious how old is your son?


The way you stated that Deaf isnt a blessing.. I really do not understand what u meant by that.. But, Let say there a reason for being deaf and of course there gotta be some People out in the hearing World wouldn't give a time of a day to learn about the Deaf...But, that shouldn't stop you from Enjoying Life as being Deaf. There are Other People that have problems with their Life and not always going to turn out Perfect. You as a Parent can do whatever you want cuz that is your Child therefore being Deaf isn't a bad thing either.
 
Yeah, perfect hearing would be 50% cuz the other 50% is bullchit! LOL!
 
I understand John and I find nothing wrong with having CI....The only thing I disagree on having a Ci is on babies and small children which they don't have a Choice in the decision process.....
 
There's nothing wrong with CI's -- it's just the general attitudes of negativity towards the issue of Cochlear Implants.
I have a CI myself -- I got it 3 years ago and so far, it's been doing heaps for me...benefiting me in some ways and other ways, it's about the same as wearing a hearing aid. But the CI has much more clearer and crisp sounds coming through -- unlike hearing aids which amplifies sounds at a higher pitch which can be quite annoying.
I respect parents who have thier toddler children implanted with a CI -- eventhough I'm not a keen supporter of having kids implanted at such a young age, but do understand that they benefit a lot more at that age rather than at a later age. Only a few will benefit from it if getting it at an older age.
 
Most of the members of this message board are not opposed to cochlear implantation. Many of us have them, and the ones who do not view them, rightfully, as a tool which they can choose to use if they so desire. When we have disagreements about the subject, and there have been many, they usually revolve around the issue of implanting deaf children who are too young to make an informed decision on the matter. What every member of this board shares in common is the belief that we are unique, and that our inability to hear does not in any way lessen us as human beings. While we all agree that deafness can be a colossal pain in the ass sometimes, we do not view it as an obstacle which prevents us from realizing our human potential. We strive to find joy in our work, our loves, our families, and our friends. We suffer disappointments and hardships, and we mourn the deaths of those who are close to us. Our inability to hear does not in any way detract us from experiencing the full range of the human condition.

What we object to is the belief that deafness presents an inherent obstacle to the full participation in the human experience, and the belief that it is an obstacle which must be overcome by any means necessary. Cochlear implantation is too often viewed not as a tool, but as a means of making a deaf person ‘normal’, as if a deaf person is somehow defective, and must be made whole again so as to be able to function as a complete and unimpaired person. Our criticisms are usually directed at hearing parents of deaf children who consider any ability to hear and communicate in spoken English, no matter how limited, as being preferred over an inability to hear and the reliance on a signed language as a form of communication. We are not card carrying militants who view adult CI recipients as weakened traitors, nor do we view the implantation of children as being inherently evil. But we believe that the implantation of children should only be done with the informed consent of the child. A deaf child is not broken, and a deaf child should not be made to feel that he or she is somehow less than fully human—but this is too often what happens when a deaf child is forced to conform to unreasonable expectations. We view cochlear implantation as a tool which can enable a deaf person to examine something outside the range of their normal experience, not as a cure for a defect which prevents a deaf person from experiencing anything at all.
 
Superb post Levonian! CIs are here to stay. I also think that more research on outcomes with different pathlogies need to be conducted to see how well the CI works with different causes of deafness. Even today there are kids who actually NEED TC programs post-oral programs! I mean I know that the percentage of prelingal oral failures is allegedly very low. However, I wonder if that has more to do with the fact that only a very small percentage of kids are born deaf. There are loads of people who went deaf post 1 year old...While that's still prelingal, their brain still has had lots of exposure to processing speech and sound the way a hearing person's brain does!
Our criticisms are usually directed at hearing parents of deaf children who consider any ability to hear and communicate in spoken English, no matter how limited, as being preferred over an inability to hear and the reliance on a signed language as a form of communication. We are not card carrying militants who view adult CI recipients as weakened traitors, nor do we view the implantation of children as being inherently evil. But we believe that the implantation of children should only be done with the informed consent of the child.
Click to expand...
AMEN!!! Someone should take this quote and put it out on the web for parents of newly dx kids!
 
deafdyke said:
AMEN!!! Someone should take this quote and put it out on the web for parents of newly dx kids!
Click to expand...

Feel free to redistribute my post in any manner you wish.
 
That reminds me—a couple of months ago you were going off about some message board for hearing parents of deaf children. You basically said that it was full of insipid whiners who do nothing but go on and on about how terrible it is that their kid can’t hear. Where is that message board? I want to read some of their crap.
 
Loomis, I'm only against CI in the cases where the benifit of implantation is ambigious. I support implantation in clear cut cases (very little and no benifit from hearing aids) but nowadays they are implanting kids who get TONS of benifit from aids b/c MAYBE it might improve residual hearing, so they can hear in difficult listening situtions or talk on the telephone (Newsflash: even hearing people have trouble listening in crowds and there is also something called a TTY!)
Some of you people say "ci makes kids think they are broken". Newsflash.........THEY ARE!!! We all are!! Being deaf isnt a blessing. We use that as a way to hide from the fact that we are not perfect. Well noone is perfect and it took me a long time to realize being deaf is far from a blessing.
Click to expand...
Ummm....where did you get that? Quote me chapter and verse!I don't think that CI itself makes kids think they are broken. It just improves their hearing a bit! What makes kids think they are broken is audism and going oral only.....
(remedial stuff)
I don't think being deaf is a blessing, but on the other hand, I don't think it's the worst thing in the world. It took me a long long long time to come to terms with my being hoh. Grew up totally totally mainstreamed (only dhh in my entire school district and under the "really bright deaf students should assimulate into the greater hearing world" model) I grew up thinking that my hearing loss was bad and I should be ashamed of it. I hated being hoh...until I realized that all a disabilty is, is a difference. Some people had to wear glasses, I had to wear hearing aids. Difference isn't good or bad....it just is!
 
she's telling everyone to consider all options but I notice many time you are pressuring them to consider adding ASL into any communication mode they are researching on. They are not your kids. if they asked what you think of it, you can express your experience but don't pressure them!
Click to expand...
BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!! Their "acceptance" of all options is beyond tokenist! What I mean by that is it's sort of like claiming that a history book has a "multicultural" slant b/c it includes one or two stories of people who aren't white males. Besides, Paula should ban herself.Every single time a parent of a newly dx kid posts, she's instantly on them to choose oral and to send their kid to an oral school!!!!! I seriously would not be one iota surprised if HE was heavily sponsored by the oral schools or even by that foundation for oral education! What you don't get Boult, is that while oral commuication is a needed skill, many of the pro-oralists do not realize that they are simply switching one dependancy for another. Many people who choose oral-only say that they don't want their kids to be dependant on a 'terp to understand or be understood....OK then how come relying on technology isn't considered dependance?
I know those kids aren't my kids. That said, AG Bell and lots of the other experts have a vested interest in seeing that oral only continues, b/c it's a HUGE moneymaker. It means more healthcare dollars! Healthcare today is expensive and hard to afford for even hearing or otherwise able-bodied folks.
If you make a dhh dependant on expensive healthcare technology, they will never be able to afford basic cost of living things. Even many middle class folks are uninsured. If you have insurance today...you're rich!
See what I mean? There is a huge pro-oral bias over there, even thou they claim that they are impartial!
I do feel as if I have a right to let people know about the downsides of going oral. Oral-only is painted as the absolute perfect utopia with absolutly zero problems. It's NOT, and oralist experts should admit that!
 
deafdyke said:
BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!! Their "acceptance" of all options is beyond tokenist! What I mean by that is it's sort of like claiming that a history book has a "multicultural" slant b/c it includes one or two stories of people who aren't white males. Besides, Paula should ban herself.Every single time a parent of a newly dx kid posts, she's instantly on them to choose oral and to send their kid to an oral school!!!!! I seriously would not be one iota surprised if HE was heavily sponsored by the oral schools or even by that foundation for oral education! What you don't get Boult, is that while oral commuication is a needed skill, many of the pro-oralists do not realize that they are simply switching one dependancy for another. Many people who choose oral-only say that they don't want their kids to be dependant on a 'terp to understand or be understood....OK then how come relying on technology isn't considered dependance?
I know those kids aren't my kids. That said, AG Bell and lots of the other experts have a vested interest in seeing that oral only continues, b/c it's a HUGE moneymaker. It means more healthcare dollars! Healthcare today is expensive and hard to afford for even hearing or otherwise able-bodied folks.
If you make a dhh dependant on expensive healthcare technology, they will never be able to afford basic cost of living things. Even many middle class folks are uninsured. If you have insurance today...you're rich!
See what I mean? There is a huge pro-oral bias over there, even thou they claim that they are impartial!
I do feel as if I have a right to let people know about the downsides of going oral. Oral-only is painted as the absolute perfect utopia with absolutly zero problems. It's NOT, and oralist experts should admit that!
Click to expand...

Did I hear violin playing in here?
 
Honestly, it all depends on the person's point of view, experience, success level and so on. So it's really all up to how well the person copes and everything. There's success stories and failure stories.
 
Sigh.....Boult, I know you think I am an extremist, but what I said is very legitmate! Many parents who are pressured into going oral only do not think about the fact that the oral route increases health care costs significently. If it were not for the profit factor, (think about it, Oral-only creates a HUGE profit for hearing people....audiology, speech and language therapy, increase in health care costs and so on!) I seriously doubt that oralism would be alive and well today. Oral deaf kids cannot function very well indepedantly (or at all) without their CI or hearing aids or other ALDs. Oral training causes them to be dependant on the healthcare system(and dependant on listening technology) . Even hearing otherwise nondisabled folks have great difficulty procuring healthcare....even middle class folks aren't always insured!
 
deafdyke said:
Sigh.....Boult, I know you think I am an extremist, but what I said is very legitmate! Many parents who are pressured into going oral only do not think about the fact that the oral route increases health care costs significently. If it were not for the profit factor, (think about it, Oral-only creates a HUGE profit for hearing people....audiology, speech and language therapy, increase in health care costs and so on!) I seriously doubt that oralism would be alive and well today. Oral deaf kids cannot function very well indepedantly (or at all) without their CI or hearing aids or other ALDs. Oral training causes them to be dependant on the healthcare system(and dependant on listening technology) . Even hearing otherwise nondisabled folks have great difficulty procuring healthcare....even middle class folks aren't always insured!
Click to expand...
its true about health care cost are going up....

Every year i get annual meeting about new insurance policy at my work.. Every year since 4 years at my workplace. They increase the Insurance costs. this thing is very disappoint news to hear every year at annual insurance meeting.

There are serveral factors why they increase just like what DeafDyke mention.. People use it for expensive health care items, such as wheelchair, CI, surgery, and people who went to doctor that they don't really need to see the doctor such as check-up.

I understand you john for your choice on your own kid for giving him oppurinty to hear with CI.. I'm giving you a respect and that's good that he can get oppurinty to hear as much as he can.. however, by the words "Deafness is Broken" I view that you're not proud of urself been Deaf, am i correct? I view that Deafness isn't broken.. i view it like a normal person.. just a regular human begin.

Calling a kid or adult "broken" its' a term of insult. IMO Its a huge insult.. it's like your car's broken and its no good to use them anymore. so you're saying that Deafness is broken means that,We, the Deaf people can't be alive?

i'm hoping you just mislabel it by accident..
 
I think I came across the wrong way by my "broken" statement. Am I proud that I am deaf...No. Am I proud of what I have acomplished in life with my dissability? yes We are not inferior to anyone because we are deaf. But I would never ever wish being deaf on my son or anyone. its been hard very hard going through life. but what doesnt kill us only makes us stronger I guess. I am sorry if I offended anyone. That was never my intention. And as far as the CI goes some of you in one sentence can sound so inteligent on the subject one minute and yet so uninformed the next. You all must know how hard it is for one to learn speech with the ci and the longer you wait the harder it is. I have given frank every oppertunity I could have and dont regret my families decision one bit. And as far as health insurance....please stop with the conspiracy theories....if its not CI's it would be something else. I have also had my insurance raised the last few years and eventually I think it will be federally regulated but thats for another time. Once again Im sorry if I offended anyone. I just have never looked at my deafness as a blessing if anyone has thats your life and you have the right to whatever you want to believe. Thanks for all the point of views
 
In all honesty, there's nothing wrong with Choclear Implants... I just feel that my tax money could go to more important things rather than a technology that works only 30% of the time. If one wants the implant - fine - pay for it yourself!

The real question is... Why do you really want it? What's wrong with being deaf? Why abolish your true identidy just because you're ashamed of who you are... just because you want to 'fit in'.. The sad truth is, with the implant... you won't fit in either.
 
My primary objections to CI's are not technological, they are social. While a Cochlear Implant is quite an interesting technology, people's perception of them is often of a 'cure-all'. My girlfriend teaches ASL classes, and often brings me in to explain deaf culture. One of the questions I tend to get is 'why don't you have a cochlear implant?'. I explain a bit about cochlear implants, and the students basically reply in some manner of "you mean it doesn't make you hearing?"
Thats my primary problem. Technologically, a cochlear implant is simply an implanted hearing aid. There is no hearing aid that provides completely 'normal' hearing, and CI's are no exception.
There are both pros and cons towards getting CIs. Unfortunately, social perception of it as a 'cure' can override people's views of this technology, and lead towards getting CI's without properly evaluating the situation.

Deaf 'militants' objections towards CI's primarily stem from this factor. While there might not be specifically anything wrong with implanting children, the problem is that by giving a 'cure', you enable people to breeze over the problem of deafness in your child without actually evaluating the overall picture.
 
Back
Top