Success for deaf community

If I understand this correctly the ruling is a good thing. If a person is a candidate and decides to get a CI the insurance companies will pay. The comments by the politician only display his ignorance. Deaf people in WI that wanted a CI but could not get one due to the cost may now be able to go through with it with the financial assistance of insurance. Remember not everyone is against a CI. Some people actually want them and many people (not everyone) actually gain some benefit from them.

[ASLGAL]

Please tell me which professionals and agencies you are speaking of? Are you saying that some employers are saying the employees have to wear a CI for environmental reasons? Is this not a breach of the rights a deaf person has under the ADA?

Let me take these one at a time:
1. No, as that would be breaking confidences, if they wish to tell their own stories they can
2. Yes
3. I believe it is but many will accomodate an employer to keep an otherwise good job/position

The WI law is another step in the direction of making the life of deaf people worse with aid of CI. The statements from the politicans prove this.

Those who favor actions like this are the mad radicals, not we who are against CI.

Agreed Flip.
Any organization that forces Oral Only or implantation of CI is acting in a criminal manner.

Originally Posted by ASLGAL

Let me take these one at a time:
1. No, as that would be breaking confidences, if they wish to tell their own stories they can
2. Yes
3. I believe it is but many will accomodate an employer to keep an otherwise good job/position


Agreed Flip.
Any organization that forces Oral Only or implantation of CI is acting in a criminal manner.

I'm sorry but I can't agree with you on number one. If you are going to make claims like that and want anyone to take you seriously then you should be providing facts to back up your claims otherwise I personally can't put any stock in them. Who's confidence are you breaking? And remember you are the one that started telling "their stories" with your claims.

As far as employers wanting the employee to wear a CI for environmental reasons that may be a legitimate request if it is in a dangerous environment where some hearing is required to avoid injuries etc. I would need more details to make an informed conclusion. What type of work are they doing etc.

[shel90]

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

I'm sorry but I can't agree with you on number one. If you are going to make claims like that and want anyone to take you seriously then you should be providing facts to back up your claims otherwise I personally can't put any stock in them. Who's confidence are you breaking? And remember you are the one that started telling "their stories" with your claims.

As far as employers wanting the employee to wear a CI for environmental reasons that may be a legitimate request if it is in a dangerous environment where some hearing is required to avoid injuries etc. I would need more details to make an informed conclusion. What type of work are they doing etc.

If employers start to force CIs and oral only on Deaf people, then it could be a ripple effect causing more discrimination against those who dont have CIs or arent oral and there is enough discrimination out there. The comments made by the politican is just proof of how some hearing people view those who dont have CIs or dont have speech skills. We cant allow employers gain the right to implement those views.

Originally Posted by shel90

If employers start to force CIs and oral only on Deaf people, then it could be a ripple effect causing more discrimination against those who dont have CIs or arent oral and there is enough discrimination out there. The comments made by the politican is just proof of how some hearing people view those who dont have CIs or dont have speech skills. We cant allow employers gain the right to implement those views.

I agree with you shel IF that is actually happening. I don't think an employer can legally do that. They can't tell a deaf person, "Sorry but in order to work here you have to get a CI and be oral" I honestly don't believe that is happening.

[shel90]

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

I agree with you shel IF that is actually happening. I don't think an employer can legally do that. They can't tell a deaf person, "Sorry but in order to work here you have to get a CI and be oral" I honestly don't believe that is happening.

I just hope it doesnt become legal...

[jillio]

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

I'm sorry but I can't agree with you on number one. If you are going to make claims like that and want anyone to take you seriously then you should be providing facts to back up your claims otherwise I personally can't put any stock in them. Who's confidence are you breaking? And remember you are the one that started telling "their stories" with your claims.

As far as employers wanting the employee to wear a CI for environmental reasons that may be a legitimate request if it is in a dangerous environment where some hearing is required to avoid injuries etc. I would need more details to make an informed conclusion. What type of work are they doing etc.

Wanting an employee to wear a CI, and requiring the employee to undergo surgery in order to keep or get a job are two very different situations. Under the ADA, it is not the employee that is mandated to make accommodations, it is the employer. How would you like it if your employer demanded that you undergo surgery to make you deaf so you would be able to block out environmental noises because it has been shown that people in a quiet environment concentrate better?

And, I agree with ASLGAL on the confidentiality issue. Using identifying information is indeed a breach of confidentiality.

[Lissa]

OMG, this is stupid. I do have a Cochlear Implant but this is going too far!!



What's wrong with being deaf? You're born with it, you shouldnt have to try and "change" it if you dont want to. You should be able to use your first language without hassle!! We dont have a go at polish people who come over to the UK for using their language so why have a go at deaf people for using BSL,ASL or any form of sign language?

[deafskeptic]

Originally Posted by DeafLissa90

OMG, this is stupid. I do have a Cochlear Implant but this is going too far!!



What's wrong with being deaf? You're born with it, you shouldnt have to try and "change" it if you dont want to. You should be able to use your first language without hassle!! We dont have a go at polish people who come over to the UK for using their language so why have a go at deaf people for using BSL,ASL or any form of sign language?

Agreed. And if my ex-bf got a CI, he'd not get much benefit from it and people would still turn him down for employment because he has no speech skills at all.

[ASLGAL]

And, I agree with ASLGAL on the confidentiality issue. Using identifying information is indeed a breach of confidentiality.

Exactly. Thank You.

I do not like your insinuation rockdrummer, I cannot/will not break a confidence to satisfy your curiosity. I am sure since you do not know them you would still call me a liar. Your problem, not mine.

[flip]

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

I agree with you shel IF that is actually happening. I don't think an employer can legally do that. They can't tell a deaf person, "Sorry but in order to work here you have to get a CI and be oral" I honestly don't believe that is happening.

This makes me think about a german writer named Günter Grass. He wrote a book about illegal immigrants in germany. He dressed up like a turk, and lived as an illegal immigrant for some months. His experiences shocked the readers in germany, and more than one refused to belive how Grass was threated in some workplaces.

[Buffalo]

Originally Posted by flip

This makes me think about a german writer named Günter Grass. He wrote a book about illegal immigrants in germany. He dressed up like a turk, and lived as an illegal immigrant for some months. His experiences shocked the readers in germany, and more than one refused to belive how Grass was threated in some workplaces.

That reminded me of the book "Black Like Me" by John Howard Griffin. I tried to google "Gunter Grass" and "Turk" but couldn't find it. Maybe it is not printed in English? I would like to read his book on this.

I am not surprised of how any people treat anybody that is in minority. I wonder how the white people would feel if they became minority and got treated badly?

[Mrs Bucket]

Originally Posted by Buffalo

That reminded me of the book "Black Like Me" by John Howard Griffin. I tried to google "Gunter Grass" and "Turk" but couldn't find it. Maybe it is not printed in English? I would like to read his book on this.

As an essayist Grass has been prolific, dealing with several topics often embedded in historical context. However, for an outsider his mockeries of what he sees to be the faults of Germany and German people, is many times hard to understand. In 1989-91 Grass opposed German's hasty reunification. In 1992 he dedicated a public address about the decline of political culture in the United Germany to the Turkish victims of Mölln. In his later essays Grass has criticized contemporary culture and politics.

Source

[flip]

Originally Posted by Buffalo

That reminded me of the book "Black Like Me" by John Howard Griffin. I tried to google "Gunter Grass" and "Turk" but couldn't find it. Maybe it is not printed in English? I would like to read his book on this.

I am not surprised of how any people treat anybody that is in minority. I wonder how the white people would feel if they became minority and got treated badly?

Sorry, I mixed Günter Wallraff with Günter Grass! They are so similar in looking and thinking to me. Like the note from Mrs Bucket show, it could be a description of Günter Wallraff or Günter Grass.

The book is named "Ganz unten", written by Günter Wallraff.

[Buffalo]

Originally Posted by flip

Sorry, I mixed Günter Wallraff with Günter Grass! They are so similar in looking and thinking to me. Like the note from Mrs Bucket show, it could be a description of Günter Wallraff or Günter Grass.

The book is named "Ganz unten", written by Günter Wallraff.

Found it at Amazon and it is titled "Lowest of Low". Thanks.

Originally Posted by ASLGAL

Exactly. Thank You.

I do not like your insinuation rockdrummer, I cannot/will not break a confidence to satisfy your curiosity. I am sure since you do not know them you would still call me a liar. Your problem, not mine.

I am going to choose to leave this conversation because it's just going in circles and getting off base.

[ASLGAL]

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

I am going to choose to leave this conversation because it's just going in circles and getting off base.

Probably a good choice.

Just remember, The AD is a great place to share experiences on pertinent topics but it does not mean a violation of confidentiality will occur just to satisfy ones curiosity. Sharing only basic information doesn't minimize the comments validity or topics discussion and absolutely is not an invitation to insinuate a fact is false.

Anyone who is involved in the D/Deaf Deafblind culture/community who violates confidentiality will not last long. Once trust is lost on that point it is almost never regained.

You will note, however that if a member is sharing personal experiences they will state such and use names.

Perhaps you have mis-understood. Below is how the conversation went.

Originally Posted by ASLGAL

……….. This particular thread may not have stated it boldly but others have and these are professionals and agencies that have enough clout and financial backing to buy what they desire, their push to an end or eradication of deafness through forced CI installation. It is already happening in some professions. ………...

In the above quote you are making claims that there are professionals/professions and agencies that are pushing “to an end or eradication of deafness through forced CI installation”. That is a pretty serious accusation.

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

Please tell me which professionals and agencies you are speaking of? …..

All I asked in the above quote was to back up your claims and provide the names of the professionals and agencies you are accusing of this practice. Why would you protect them and not want to expose them. Assuming this is occurring, how can anyone be expected to go against it or fight it if they don’t know who or what agencies are doing it? Again, why would you protect them?

Originally Posted by ASLGAL

….. No, as that would be breaking confidences, if they wish to tell their own stories they can…….

I would agree with you that naming particular persons might be a breach but naming a profession or agency would not be. Which professions or agencies are “pushing to an end or eradication of deafness through forced CI installation?”

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

………… If you are going to make claims like that and want anyone to take you seriously then you should be providing facts to back up your claims otherwise I personally can't put any stock in them. Who's confidence are you breaking? …………...

I stand behind the above quote 100%. It would be foolish for anyone to simply believe what someone on the internet claims without facts and /or information to back it up. And, why if such otrocitries are occurring would you protect those that are commiting them and not expose them? To me, it doesn’t have the ring of truth.

Originally Posted by ASLGAL

………I do not like your insinuation rockdrummer, I cannot/will not break a confidence to satisfy your curiosity. ……...

OK, let me remove the insinuation. If you can’t back up your claims with facts then I don’t believe you.

To keep this on track, I came to this thread supporting those that were outraged by the comments of a politician. Somehow this has gotten twisted down the anti CI agenda path with claims of a forced CI installation conspiracy. It's really why some threads get way off track and get into heated discussions and end up locked. That was never my intention in participating in this thread but yet here we are.

[dreama]

I believe ASLGAL.

The employers probably believe the CI will work miricles on their deaf employees. They probably don't realise it's just another tool in the box that might not even work. You know that. I know that but do they?

[Buffalo]

Originally Posted by dreama

I believe ASLGAL.

The employers probably believe the CI will work miricles on their deaf employees. They probably don't realise it's just another tool in the box that might not even work. You know that. I know that but do they?

Exactly!

[ASLGAL]

Thanks dreama and Buffalo.

As I, jillio as well, have tried to explain what confidentiality means there are always those who try to twist and turn to make it sound as though just one little morsel of information wouldn't be violating an ethic.

To name a specific business or entity would indeed be too much information rockdrummer, guess you will just have to not believe. But please, save insinutations and accusations for something you can prove wrong.

ASLGAL - I completely respect your viewpoints and opinions. I’m sorry but what you are saying about forced CI installation I simply don't believe. That is one thing you are going to have to back up with facts. In my opinion you are contributing to the problem by not providing information that would allow people to fight against such a thing (if it is really happening.)

But..........

Let’s keep this in perspective. The title of this thread is Success for the Deaf community which is in fact what it really is. It's about a law that will require insurance companies to cover the expense of a CI where in the past riders existed that excluded them. This is really a good thing. Believe it or not there are folks that want a CI but can’t get one due to the expense or because their insurance won’t cover it. This is the real story;

MADISON, Wis. -
Wisconsin lawmakers acted Thursday to become the first state to require insurance companies to cover cochlear implants for children with severe hearing problems.

Both houses of the Democratic-controlled Legislature approved a bill that requires private health insurance plans to cover cochlear implants, hearing aids and related treatment for anyone under the age of 18. Gov. Jim Doyle, a Democrat, promised to sign it into law.
Source: Wis. could be first to require cochlear implants - Chicago Tribune

The problem and why I believe this thread is headed down a dirt road is two fold. First the title "Wisconsin could be first to require cochlear implants" could have been worded better. It should have read “Wisconsin could be the first to require cochlear implants be covered by insurance.”

Secondly, there were comments made by the politician that are no doubt ignorant and insensitive and people including myself reacted to those comments. I took it a step further and provided the contact information of the politician in hopes that people that are outraged by his comments would at least contact him and tactfully educate him on the realities of deafness. Here it is again for those that are outraged by his the comments. I would urge you to contact him and let him know your feelings. Be tactful if you want to be taken seriously.

Telephone
(608) 267-9836 Or
(888) 534-0013

Email
Rep.Cullen@legis.wisconsin.gov

Voting Address
2845 North 68th Street
Milwaukee, WI 53210

Did you use the information I provided and contact the politician? Did anybody?

I don’t know the man personally but my guess is that he just doesn’t know any better and if people were to contact him and let him know the errors in his comments, he may change his viewpoints. Education and awareness will go a long way to help the cause.

How a thread about a Success for the deaf community turns into a conspiracy about forced implants is beyond me. It seems that many threads that have anything to do with a CI get infected by radical positions and go down a path that has nothing to do with the original topic. I’m sorry if you don’t agree with my points but I have looked at this as objectively as I possibly can.

Peace!

Originally Posted by dreama

I believe ASLGAL.

The employers probably believe the CI will work miricles on their deaf employees. They probably don't realise it's just another tool in the box that might not even work. You know that. I know that but do they?

Really? You honestly believe that deaf people are being forced to get implanted?

[deafskeptic]

Originally Posted by dreama

I believe ASLGAL.

The employers probably believe the CI will work miricles on their deaf employees. They probably don't realise it's just another tool in the box that might not even work. You know that. I know that but do they?

Yup. There's a reason why I'm uncomfortable when hearing call my CI a miracle.

[Buffalo]

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

Really? You honestly believe that deaf people are being forced to get implanted?

Why not? The eugenic law in America had many deaf people sterilized along with other types of people that the law deemed to be inferior. That law is still on the book but subsequent laws block that law. I won't be surprised if they will reverse those subsequent laws when there is overpopulation. Even now in modern times, the deaf people in China have to be sterlized if they want to get married.

http://www.nytimes.com/1993/12/22/wo...al-births.html

In a way, CI is like sterlization of the deaf people. It is like forcing all the people to be the same - the hearing way. I won't be surprised if they pass the law like that. It is the hearing way. They just think the deaf people would be less of a burden if they all can hear with CI. Actually I think the deaf people would be less of burden if all hearing people learn ASL. See, if a hearing person who lost his/her hearing and can't afford CI, can survive without CI if everybody knows ASL. Simple solution.

I doubt they will let us have the full control of the Deaf Education. It is the hearing way. That is the truth whether you like it or not.

[LDNanna]

ASLgal, Buffalo, Jillio, Good for you!!! Thank you. When politics open the door just a crack, then it is pushed wider by those groups who may have a monetary interest, such as CI companies, medical groups, insurance companies, and others. One small step does equal a giant leap. I am not qualified for CI, but it is scary to think that one could be coerced or forced into making that decision for themselves or their children. That is a very personal decision whether for self or dependents. Not to be coerced by misguided politics.

[shel90]

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

Really? You honestly believe that deaf people are being forced to get implanted?

Not forced but definitely pressured. Big time.

[Buffalo]

Originally Posted by Nan_Mathews

ASLgal, Buffalo, Jillio, Good for you!!! Thank you. When politics open the door just a crack, then it is pushed wider by those groups who may have a monetary interest, such as CI companies, medical groups, insurance companies, and others. One small step does equal a giant leap. I am not qualified for CI, but it is scary to think that one could be coerced or forced into making that decision for themselves or their children. That is a very personal decision whether for self or dependents. Not to be coerced by misguided politics.

Exactly. People can be pushy to get you to accept CI just because they believe in CI too much. That is not too far from passing a law requiring all deaf babies to be implanted. It might not be only monetary reason, it could be (I don't know a better word but this one in a perverse way ) altruistic reason.

[dreama]

Originally Posted by rockdrummer

Really? You honestly believe that deaf people are being forced to get implanted?

Yes I do. It deffinately does NOT surprise me at all. I definately think some people are presurized into it. I felt major pressure on me to contine using my HA towards the end. Even though I hated them and it seems I suffered from severe recruitment. So much so that it came as a releif when my hearing finally went altogether. I live in dread of it ever comming back again.

[deafskeptic]

Originally Posted by Buffalo

Why not? The eugenic law in America had many deaf people sterilized along with other types of people that the law deemed to be inferior. That law is still on the book but subsequent laws block that law. I won't be surprised if they will reverse those subsequent laws when there is overpopulation. Even now in modern times, the deaf people in China have to be sterlized if they want to get married.

China Weighs Using Sterilization and Abortions to Stop 'Abnormal' Births - The New York Times

In a way, CI is like sterlization of the deaf people. It is like forcing all the people to be the same - the hearing way. I won't be surprised if they pass the law like that. It is the hearing way. They just think the deaf people would be less of a burden if they all can hear with CI. Actually I think the deaf people would be less of burden if all hearing people learn ASL. See, if a hearing person who lost his/her hearing and can't afford CI, can survive without CI if everybody knows ASL. Simple solution.

I doubt they will let us have the full control of the Deaf Education. It is the hearing way. That is the truth whether you like it or not.

Excellent post!