Question reguarding CI

Hi! I am hearing and an ASL student. I have had some basic ASL skills from a college course I took 10 years ago but we did not learn ANYTHING about deaf culture in that class. The course I'm taking now is going in depth about the culture. I'm reading the "Don't Just Sign! Communicate..." series and I was just reading a blurb about the Cochlear Implants. I totally understand why it is a touchy subject. In my college course, we were required to read a book, "Deaf Like Me" which was an awesome book and I learned a LOT through that book alone. Then I have a cousin who is 6 years old now and was diagnosed with a disease that left him with an 80% hearing loss at both. His parents opted to get him the implants. Then a few years later they upgraded them for him to be able to go to the ocean. My confusion lies within this paragraph of one of the books I'm reading:

"Deaf people believe that an individual should have the right to choose which culture they will belong to. The implants don't have to be used, but they cannot be removed. Therefore, one culture is chosen for a child - one path." ~Don't Just Sign! Communicate - A Student's Guide to ASL and the Deaf Community.

If the CI doesn't have to be used and the child could still learn their own language, ASL, why is NOT having implants considered the only way they can choose what they want? Seems like if the implants are there then the child can decide as he/she grows up if they want to use them or not instead of not having the option at all. I know this is a very VERY touchy subject, I'm just curious.

how much is it fees for us to do your homework/project>?

lol! Its not homework. I just want to get a better understanding incase my family asks I give an honest response instead of my own confused opinion.

Ask hearing people. They are the one who builds the deaf kids' mind and future and being in hearing's world/society. Nothing else.

The idea of Implanting "children" is to "assist in speaking/hearing".

Whether that "child" should "learn/use" ASL is the parents decision. One can surmise that how many persons the parents know/ use ASL may have some consideration.

aside: I have been bilateral DEAF since December 20, 2006.

Malee2012-obviously from reading comments in Alldeaf.com not ALL deaf persons "subscribe that deafness is a culture-who use ASL et al"
Cochlear Implants do assist SOME deaf persons to "hear" if they are "suitable for Implantation". It is fact-not every is-in the real world outside Sociology-deaf culture.

further aside: at the Cochlear Implant section Sunnybrook Hospital/Toronto since 1983 just over 3000 ADULTS were tested for implants. 2000 were "unsuitable" variety of reasons. Thus the 1000 left - were. I was one of them-over 7 years ago. Info given at a recent patients meeting last year.

The real world is a "bit different than computer screens"!

Thank you drPhil for the input. I didn't know that one had to "qualify" or be "suitable" as you say for the CI. Which, if I'm understanding you correctly, would make sense. Thank you!

I don't know the book, but the sentence you are quoting seems a bit biased to me.

Don't take it as a fact, but as the writer's opinion. Even people with CIs can know sign language and be part of Deaf culture, although they probably won't be "highly valued members of the Deaf community", just a tolerated part

Malee2012 said:

Hi! I am hearing and an ASL student. I have had some basic ASL skills from a college course I took 10 years ago but we did not learn ANYTHING about deaf culture in that class. The course I'm taking now is going in depth about the culture. I'm reading the "Don't Just Sign! Communicate..." series and I was just reading a blurb about the Cochlear Implants. I totally understand why it is a touchy subject. In my college course, we were required to read a book, "Deaf Like Me" which was an awesome book and I learned a LOT through that book alone. Then I have a cousin who is 6 years old now and was diagnosed with a disease that left him with an 80% hearing loss at both. His parents opted to get him the implants. Then a few years later they upgraded them for him to be able to go to the ocean. My confusion lies within this paragraph of one of the books I'm reading:

"Deaf people believe that an individual should have the right to choose which culture they will belong to. The implants don't have to be used, but they cannot be removed. Therefore, one culture is chosen for a child - one path." ~Don't Just Sign! Communicate - A Student's Guide to ASL and the Deaf Community.

If the CI doesn't have to be used and the child could still learn their own language, ASL, why is NOT having implants considered the only way they can choose what they want? Seems like if the implants are there then the child can decide as he/she grows up if they want to use them or not instead of not having the option at all. I know this is a very VERY touchy subject, I'm just curious.

Click to expand...

This book seems very biased.
Think of it like this- hearing aids can be beneficial to some people with hearing loss and help them interact with the "hearing world". But hearing aids can be taken off, allowing the person to relax in relative quiet.

For people like me with profound hearing loss, hearing aids don't work. My cochleas are so damaged that amplified sound just doesn't work. I wore high powered hearing aids until I got my cochlear implant earlier this year and towards the end (my hearing loss is progressive) my hearing aids just made noise louder.

I now have a cochlear implant in my right ear. Without the processor on, I am still totally deaf. Still the same person who learned ASL as a child. When I put my cochlear implant processor on, I can hear. So much more than the static I heard with hearing aids. I can hear speech and music, cats meowing, cars honking.

Sure, the implanted portion isn't removed but that doesn't mean I am forced to hear all day. I can remove the processor and be totally deaf.

The argument about cochlear implants in children really revolves around the fact that for a cochlear implant to be useful, a child needs to be implanted early and needs to have intensive therapy (hearing children aren't born with perfect hearing, they spend months learning how to hear in the womb and in the world as infants).
Implanting a child who has been totally deaf at age 10 is not going to be as effective as implanting a child at age 1. The brain needs to learn how to hear.

In all honesty, the book you quote has things backwards. A cochlear implant can give a child the opportunity to be part of deaf cultrure and the hearing world.
Once the brain has matured it is much harder to learn new things.

I'm not saying cochlear implants are the only choice for all deaf children. I AM saying that the tired argument that giving a child the opportunity (and practice necessary) to hear isn't "choosing a culture" for the child. It is keeping options open.

Personally, if my husband and I have deaf children who are cochlear implant candidates as infants, we will sign with them constantly and get them implanted. That way they have a choice and tools to deal with any situation. They would be able to sign and hear.

Totally agree!! I got in arguments with people on here when I first joined about exactly that.

They DO have a choice to wear or not wear it. The implant does not work without the processor. Later in life they CAN choose to not wear it, choose to be deaf.

I believe I said something like making a child wait until they're 16 or whatever, "old enough" to make the choice themselves actually takes the choice away from them. They're too old at that point to make the same kind of progress as they would if they were implanted as babies. Auditory pathways are laid before the age if 2, if you make them wait til 16, they missed that boat. That ship sailed 14 years ago they will NEVER get the same benefit. They think they're doing a child a favor, by letting then choose, but they're doing them a disservice and taking the choice away. IMO anyway

ambrosia said:

Totally agree!! I got in arguments with people on here when I first joined about exactly that.

They DO have a choice to wear or not wear it. The implant does not work without the processor. Later in life they CAN choose to not wear it, choose to be deaf.

I believe I said something like making a child wait until they're 16 or whatever, "old enough" to make the choice themselves actually takes the choice away from them. They're too old at that point to make the same kind of progress as they would if they were implanted as babies. Auditory pathways are laid before the age if 2, if you make them wait til 16, they missed that boat. That ship sailed 14 years ago they will NEVER get the same benefit. They think they're doing a child a favor, by letting then choose, but they're doing them a disservice and taking the choice away. IMO anyway

Click to expand...

totally agree.

From infancy till around age 3-4 the brain is amazingly changeable (I've been told I use medical terminology too often so I'm trying to change that).
Waiting until a child is 12 or 16 or 18 so that they can "choose" a cochlear implant is not a choice at all. They are not provided with the tools necessary to utilize a cochlear implant (like any practice hearing at all. Hearing is mostly a brain activity). Thus people say cochlear implants are useless. No shit, if you never expose a child's brain to sound, it won't be easily able to understand sound at age 18.

ecp said:

totally agree.

From infancy till around age 3-4 the brain is amazingly changeable (I've been told I use medical terminology too often so I'm trying to change that).
Waiting until a child is 12 or 16 or 18 so that they can "choose" a cochlear implant is not a choice at all. They are not provided with the tools necessary to utilize a cochlear implant (like any practice hearing at all. Hearing is mostly a brain activity). Thus people say cochlear implants are useless. No shit, if you never expose a child's brain to sound, it won't be easily able to understand sound at age 18.

Click to expand...

I believe that many of those here who actually advocate for waiting do know this, but really don't care. They believe by waiting, a point will be made that there was never a need. Deaf is fine, no need to hear.

These folks should never be parents. The natural and healthy inclination for any parent should be to give their child any opportunities to help them get ahead in this world....especially those opportunities the parent never had! A deaf parent should not be thinking "Well, I'm deaf so my child should be deaf" or "I just had hearing aids, so my child can get by with hearing aids as well."

If you have a loss that over 30 years ago would have been best suited by having a Cochlear Implant as opposed to limping along with a hearing aid, why would you impose that on your child just because in your day it wasn't an available option for you and it is now too late for you to really derive that benefit? This is 2014 and there are far more suitable ways to provide useful hearing than shoving a hearing aid in an ear that will only decipher it as crude noise. If that is what you are doing to your child after you have had it explained to you by a medical professional that a hearing aid is not suitable today as a treatment, you aren't doing your job as a parent.

BleedingPurist said:

I believe that many of those here who actually advocate for waiting do know this, but really don't care. They believe by waiting, a point will be made that there was never a need. Deaf is fine, no need to hear.

These folks should never be parents. The natural and healthy inclination for any parent should be to give their child any opportunities to help them get ahead in this world....especially those opportunities the parent never had! A deaf parent should not be thinking "Well, I'm deaf so my child should be deaf" or "I just had hearing aids, so my child can get by with hearing aids as well."

If you have a loss that over 30 years ago would have been best suited by having a Cochlear Implant as opposed to limping along with a hearing aid, why would you impose that on your child just because in your day it wasn't an available option for you and it is now too late for you to really derive that benefit? This is 2014 and there are far more suitable ways to provide useful hearing than shoving a hearing aid in an ear that will only decipher it as crude noise. If that is what you are doing to your child after you have had it explained to you by a medical professional that a hearing aid is not suitable today as a treatment, you aren't doing your job as a parent.

Click to expand...

Are you looking for some troubles with deaf parents if they have deaf kids? You do not know anything about being deaf parent. I suggest you not to say such things about deaf/Deaf parents. If I give birth to my kid who happen to be deaf, and i would definitely encourage deaf kid to learn how to speak and ASL, but i dont know about Cochlear implants yet. I am not comofratble because I used to be an athletic girl. I want this deaf kids to play opportunaties of any sports WITH ROUGH physical things in their early age. I know CI users can play sport but not in a roughly way from what i have seen. What's more, small baby with small head with CI equipment on will more likely shape up on the head when kid get older. It would effect the shape up and nerves on the head. That is my concern as well.
Actually, I notice lot of deaf people who learned how to speak or listen, and decide to get a CI at a much later, and they are doing very well. Honest.. Like my hubby. I swear that he don't realize how much he is really doing well when he got a CI, like he picked it up fast after he got a CI in his 30's. He is deafer than i am. It gave me some ideas to think that some deaf kids can do it if they are in speech therapy at a early age then get a CI later. If deaf kids want a CI on their own, then I would allow them to make choice.

Again, remember having CI aka having surgery/operations may not always be succesful in helping or recovering. Yes It's an surgical risk.

Frisky Feline said:

Are you looking for some troubles with deaf parents if they have deaf kids? You do not know anything about being deaf parent. I suggest you not to say such things about deaf/Deaf parents. If I give birth to my kid who happen to be deaf, and i would definitely encourage deaf kid to learn how to speak and ASL, but i dont know about Cochlear implants yet. I am not comofratble because I used to be an athletic girl. I want this deaf kids to play opportunaties of any sports WITH ROUGH physical things in their early age. I know CI users can play sport but not in a roughly way from what i have seen. What's more, small baby with small head with CI equipment on will more likely shape up on the head when kid get older. It would effect the shape up and nerves on the head. That is my concern as well.
Actually, I notice lot of deaf people who learned how to speak or listen, and decide to get a CI at a much later, and they are doing very well. Honest.. Like my hubby. I swear that he don't realize how much he is really doing well when he got a CI, like he picked it up fast after he got a CI in his 30's. He is deafer than i am. It gave me some ideas to think that some deaf kids can do it if they are in speech therapy at a early age then get a CI later. If deaf kids want a CI on their own, then I would allow them to make choice.

Again, remember having CI aka having surgery/operations may not always be succesful in helping or recovering. Yes It's an surgical risk.

Click to expand...

The gist of my post was about parents should more for their children than they had. Parents who raise their kids to live within the same confines; be it financially, career-wise, neighborhood, schooling.... because they selfishly want their kids to be the same as they are shouldn't be parents.

There's a big world out there and I'd want my child to have full access to it in any way possible for them.

If not even about concerning about the surgicial risk and still call Deaf parents selfish?? I dont think do.

Have you heard about Heather Artinian? Heather was 6 year old Deaf girl who wanted CI for herself because she made a decision with her Deaf parents' support. But, parents won't let her getting CI until she was 9 years old. I personally know her father, Peter.

I am sure that Heather is aware of pros and cons of getting CI, so she chose it anyway.

Sound and Fury (film) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Now, Heather is accepted into Law school at Georgetown University. She can both speak well and use sign language.

Deaf Student With Cochlear Implant Argues for Bridging Two Worlds - Georgetown University

Now, are you telling me that hearing parents want their children to speak like them by putting CI on their heads at very young age such as 1 year old? Do babies make their decisions? They are not fully developed yet. That irks me the most. Those parents are selfish.. Hello??

I understand that you want a child to have full access to it. What about using various communication tools? That will benefit a child in many ways, even without CIs. Simple as that. :roll:

Heather is an exceptional person and fairly unusual.
As you can see in Sound and Fury, her grandmother works with her on listening and speaking well before she gets a cochlear implant.

The argument for implanting children early is not to make them like hearing people but to give them the best chance to be able to use hearing. Implanting early does not prevent ability to learn ASL or be a part of Deaf culture EXCEPT when Deaf culture excludes people with cochlear implants.

Early implantation doesn't prevent children from learning sign language at all.

An deaf infant has two metaphorical roads open to them. One is ASL and one is hearing. All deaf babies can go down the ASL road whether or not they get cochlear implants but the longer a cochlear implant is delayed the harder it will be for the child to take advantage of hearing.


And since you bring up Sound and Fury, one thing that disturbs me about the film is that the grandmother asks Heather's mother if she can read a recipe without help. And she can't.
Being able to take part of deaf and hearing education and having as many ways to learn as possible is best for children.

edit-I'm re watching sound and fury now. Mari's parents admit that they grew up isolated and didn't have the same choices as hearing children. Basically everybody who is deaf in the film says they had a rough childhood and weren't given the same opportunities as hearing people but they are against cochlear implants because they are afraid.
The whole Artinian family ended up getting cochlear implants.
http://www.handsandvoices.org/articles/misc/V8-4_soundfury.htm
http://www.nvrc.org/2011/06/keynote-address-the-rest-of-the-artinian-story/

ecp said:

Heather is an exceptional person and fairly unusual.
As you can see in Sound and Fury, her grandmother works with her on listening and speaking well before she gets a cochlear implant.

The argument for implanting children early is not to make them like hearing people but to give them the best chance to be able to use hearing. Implanting early does not prevent ability to learn ASL or be a part of Deaf culture EXCEPT when Deaf culture excludes people with cochlear implants.

Early implantation doesn't prevent children from learning sign language at all.

An deaf infant has two metaphorical roads open to them. One is ASL and one is hearing. All deaf babies can go down the ASL road whether or not they get cochlear implants but the longer a cochlear implant is delayed the harder it will be for the child to take advantage of hearing.


And since you bring up Sound and Fury, one thing that disturbs me about the film is that the grandmother asks Heather's mother if she can read a recipe without help. And she can't.
Being able to take part of deaf and hearing education and having as many ways to learn as possible is best for children.

edit-I'm re watching sound and fury now. Mari's parents admit that they grew up isolated and didn't have the same choices as hearing children. Basically everybody who is deaf in the film says they had a rough childhood and weren't given the same opportunities as hearing people but they are against cochlear implants because they are afraid.
The whole Artinian family ended up getting cochlear implants.
Hands & Voices :: ‘Sound and Fury' Update
Keynote Address: The Rest of the Artinian Story | NVRC.org

Click to expand...

most of them are my friends, most of them got CI because they are too curious after heather explained to them, not because of not able to get opportunities. I personally know them. Oh let me clarify that Peter the father of heather's is the one who did not get CI. He's still the same. His sister got a CI because she is curious. She enjoys the CI whenever she feels but she's the same. Her son got CI as well. His wife got CI but never used it. I am not sure what you saw about grandma asked heather's mom to read the recipe. Recently i saw her reading the notes with no problem. I dont know if it relates with receipes or something. The bottom line is that artini family strongly encouraged them to get CI .. Peter's brother is hearing, and his son got ci. Actually, It puts lot of pressures on Peter, and his sister Jeanette by their parents.

I heard it is sadly community It is seriously news. Deaf community riskly.

Cochlear implant is news happened didn't supported ASL community. It is very reasonize. my community provinced sadly. surprised complication..

It is risk very alots of problem situation state. alots of risk state of province of cochlear implant of medication cause review medication whether prevent cause problem damage community.

I studies province to. it is very risk. audiologist said not allow asl language thety find out audilogist is very risk policy. it is very serious. they
strictness Cochlear Implant.

It interesting conflict to Cochlear Implant culture history but deaf want to whether decision right to respect to ASL prefer own straight to fair to value to common to 100%


I said complication risk....

Having just crossed the 7th anniversary of getting a Cochlear Implant I don't consider that I "belong a Cochlear Implant community" here in Toronto. I know a few individuals that I met at Sunnybrook/Toronto at the same time that I was "evaluated for implanation".

There is a patients meeting once a year at Sunnybrook. Usually advising the latest on implants etc. Hardly, to me, a "community".

As for whether one-after Implanation" should learn/use "Asl"-one's individual choice.

An interesting fact re: Cochlear Implants- Sunnybrook/Toronto have "examined just over 3000 ADULTS" since 1983. 2000 were "deemed unsuitable-variety of reasons" which leaves 1000 implanted. I was one of them back in 2007. Only 18 persons implanted didn't benefit from their Implant.

Also,, I was never advised NOT to learn/use ASL. The choice was entirely up to me-in this regard.

aside: deaf children are in separate category. re: whether they can "assisted in Learning to speak". As mentioned many times-choice made by the parents of their child. There are 2 centres here in Ontario: Hospital for Sick Children/Toronto and OttawaRegional centre for Sick children-I believe is the correct name.
As I understand seems for the first few years their brain is capable of "learning /speaking language". Thus "timng" is important.

aside: I live in the province of Ontario whether other provinces/countries follow what I have keyed above-no direct knowledge. But "suspect similiar consideration effected".

aside: interesting to determine what the actual experience of other centres around the world in comparison to Sunnybrook/Toronto would be? I don't recall such info here in AllDeaf.com.

aside: I became bilateral DEAF December 20, 2006 which is still the case today.

Smithtr said:

I heard it is sadly community It is seriously news. Deaf community riskly.

Cochlear implant is news happened didn't supported ASL community. It is very reasonize. my community provinced sadly. surprised complication..

It is risk very alots of problem situation state. alots of risk state of province of cochlear implant of medication cause review medication whether prevent cause problem damage community.

I studies province to. it is very risk. audiologist said not allow asl language thety find out audilogist is very risk policy. it is very serious. they
strictness Cochlear Implant.

It interesting conflict to Cochlear Implant culture history but deaf want to whether decision right to respect to ASL prefer own straight to fair to value to common to 100%


I said complication risk....

Click to expand...

I don't know what you are trying to say.