Which Choices of Communication should Hearing parents use for their implanted child? - Page 2

Hwy99 · 10-01-2007, 08:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shel90

I am seeing the opposite. I am seeing the deaf kids from the Deaf community wanting to be like their friends who have the CIs. They want one too. I guess it is different in parts of the nation. I think MD Deaf community is much more receptive to CI users than most other Deaf communities elsewhere. I could be wrong but according to my friend's brother who moved from Florida..he was shocked to see CI users in the Deaf community and how accepting most people were since according to him, from his Deaf community, they are not as accepting. I think it will change anyway.

Yeah I agree, the numbers of deaf people who bullied on deaf people with CI and knows no signs are beginning to decreasing. I know there is a lot of deaf people pulled some of deaf people with CI to learn the sign language.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tousi

That does not tell me what you will do. Do YOU, not other parents, now desire to get a CI for your child if he/she cannot benefit from a hearing aid?

You already said no to the CI if the HA doesn't benefit and will raise the child in the deaf lefestyle.

Which is it? If you don't want to say, that is alright.

I don't understand what you are asking.. The reason why I post two different opinion is because this thread ask "What if you have implanted deaf child" so I thought I would post my own wish and if I am the parents who desire a child to hear and talk, or already have a child that are implanted.

Drew's Dad · 10-01-2007, 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drew's Dad

It depends on the age at which the child was implanted, their support system, educational resources, and their abilities - among other things.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

Would you care to elaborate on that?

For example, if a child is receiving their implant at age 10, the oral approach is much less realistic compared to one recieving bilateral implants at 9 months. Similarly, if there are no oral deaf schools where the family can live, (or poor ones) the oral approach is not ideal. If the parents are foolish enough to think a CI is a "cure", then the oral approach sounds like a disaster waiting to happen.

Other styles may similarly not work due to educational resource limits or lack of family involvement, or simply because it doesn't really work well for the child for whatever reason. Obviously if something is not working you need to take a different approach.

These examples certainly don't cover everything.

jillio · 10-01-2007, 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drew's Dad

For example, if a child is receiving their implant at age 10, the oral approach is much less realistic compared to one recieving bilateral implants at 9 months. Similarly, if there are no oral deaf schools where the family can live, (or poor ones) the oral approach is not ideal. If the parents are foolish enough to think a CI is a "cure", then the oral approach sounds like a disaster waiting to happen.

Other styles may similarly not work due to educational resource limits or lack of family involvement, or simply because it doesn't really work well for the child for whatever reason. Obviously if something is not working you need to take a different approach.

These examples certainly don't cover everything.

Thanks for clarifying!

Drew's Dad · 10-01-2007, 10:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

Thanks for clarifying!

Evidently I missed a joke.

jillio · 10-01-2007, 10:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drew's Dad

Evidently I missed a joke.

Huh? No joke...I'm not sure what you are talking about. Iaked a question, you answered it, and I said thank you. Where is the joke?

**Liebling:-)))** · 10-02-2007, 05:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shel90

Sign and speech...like neecy who wants to show that she supports signing, I want to show that I support having speech since some ADers think I am against having speech along with signing.

Hope this thread wil clear up any misunderstandings.

Exactly... I am glad that Cheri created a thread here...

I voted both Sign Language and Speech

**Liebling:-)))** · 10-02-2007, 05:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

Guess what my vote was!

I know what your vote is because I know you and your many posts well...

Drew's Dad · 10-02-2007, 06:51 AM

[QUOTE=jillio;846173]Huh? No joke...I'm not sure what you are talking about.QUOTE]

My apologies, I don't even remember what I was thinking last night.

**Angel** · 10-02-2007, 08:20 AM

I'm very curious, who voted "sign language only" and why?...

jillio · 10-02-2007, 09:48 AM

[QUOTE=Drew's Dad;846302]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jillio

Huh? No joke...I'm not sure what you are talking about.QUOTE]

My apologies, I don't even remember what I was thinking last night.

Accepted. Not a problem!

dreama · 10-06-2007, 01:41 PM

I vote sign and speech.

Since I don't aprove of a child being implanted until they are old enough to make their own choice then they would be raised using sign language from 6 months onwards. They would also learn to read and write and speak using hearing aid or vibrating system (if HA didn't work) although it seems unfortunate that vibrating systems seem to be going out of busness thanks to CI.

Miss-Delectable · 10-07-2007, 01:53 AM

I agree with most of the posters on here.
Using many tools to help your child is the best way to go instead of restricting to one tool.

Too many parents didn't think about using a full toolbox, like deafdyke mentioned.

Cloggy · 10-07-2007, 03:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PuyoPiyo

........... Also those deaf children with CI that don't know how to sign was bullied by those are deaf that knows sign is the truth. For example, one girl during my high school, she have the CI and don't know how to sign. She really want to learn sign, so she came to the deafies group and I have been hearing lot of deaf people say bad things about her just like she is other hearing person................

Finally the effort is made to have a child with CI in a Deaf environment, and this happens.... (And I know it's no an incident...)

Sad....

Bye bye bi-bi

**shel90** · 10-07-2007, 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cloggy

Finally the effort is made to have a child with CI in a Deaf environment, and this happens.... (And I know it's no an incident...)

Sad....

Bye bye bi-bi

That problem is happening less and less since there are many CI users who are using the BiBi approach along with non CI users so they have had exposure to both. It is nice to see that happening at my school and that is my goal. Acceptance of each other.

I know one deaf girl who went to a public school and she expressed that the deaf kids with CIs do not know sign and they bullied her calling her deaf and dumb or deaf and mute. Pretty sad huh?

Cloggy · 10-07-2007, 08:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shel90

That problem is happening less and less since there are many CI users who are using the BiBi approach along with non CI users so they have had exposure to both. It is nice to see that happening at my school and that is my goal. Acceptance of each other.

I know one deaf girl who went to a public school and she expressed that the deaf kids with CIs do not know sign and they bullied her calling her deaf and dumb or deaf and mute. Pretty sad huh?

It is!

Here's another sad example...

**shel90** · 10-07-2007, 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cloggy

It is!

Here's another sad example...

I agree and it all needs to be changed from both sides.

Cloggy · 10-07-2007, 09:14 AM

Deal !

Back on topic:
(BTW... why is there no "Speech Only" option ??)

Communication is the main thing. When a child cannot hear, sign will be the mode of communication (after touch and vision)
But remember that at the very young age, signlanguage or ASL is not established. It will be separate signs, without grammar.
When a decision is made for CI, signs will be an important tool in order to stay in constant communication with the child, but in my experience, sign-"language" will might not evolve. It might stagnate at the level where the child prefers speech over sign. It will call you from another room, it will ask questions, and reply to questions with it's back turned to you. It will want to talk on the speakerphone with the grandparents, and with the normal phone later on.
We went through these stages, and were happy to see that Lotte chose her own direction. For now, it is speech. Both in Dutch and Norwegian, and sign for her is something that does not have structure... For her signs are iconics. After all, that's how she used them just before she stopped using them...

But the main thing is to have the communication. When we notice that she is not developing her speech, we might want to add cued speech (being closer to speech.) and if all fails we will add signs, and even sign-language.

For now, we - as in us (the parents and siblings) and Lotte - use speech and it works well. With family, friends, and strangers....

**Cheri** · 10-07-2007, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cloggy

Deal !

Back on topic:
(BTW... why is there no "Speech Only" option ??).

You must be blind, It's right on top of the voting poll "Cued speech and Speech communication a language development tool for deaf children."

jillio · 10-07-2007, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shel90

That problem is happening less and less since there are many CI users who are using the BiBi approach along with non CI users so they have had exposure to both. It is nice to see that happening at my school and that is my goal. Acceptance of each other.

I know one deaf girl who went to a public school and she expressed that the deaf kids with CIs do not know sign and they bullied her calling her deaf and dumb or deaf and mute. Pretty sad huh?

Absolutely. Since we are seeing an influx of childrenwho have been implanted at young ages into the educational system that are unable to keep up with hearing peers with only minimal accommodations in an oral only environment, we are also seeing a greater support of these children and the Bi-Bi method of education for these children. Support is gathering from the CI community......at least from those who are focused on their children's education and not just on their speech and hearing.

And the CI children who bully the non CI implanted children are picking up on the attitude of superiority from someone? Where do you suppose they are getting that attitude? I would suggest it is coming from their homes and their parents. They have to be taught to believe that they are superior to the signing deaf...it is not an innate idea. It is taught in many subtle and covert ways. The sad part is, that even though parents have instilled this attitude in them as children, when they reach adulthood, society will quickly convey the message that perhaps they are not as superior as they have been led to believe. It is a sad awakening for these kids to discover that, even with CI, and even though they have been given the message throughput their childhood that they are now a part of the hearing world, the hearing world will be quick to point out the fact that they are still perceived as different. Let the adjustment crisis begin!

jillio · 10-07-2007, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cloggy

Deal !

Back on topic:
(BTW... why is there no "Speech Only" option ??)

Communication is the main thing. When a child cannot hear, sign will be the mode of communication (after touch and vision)
But remember that at the very young age, signlanguage or ASL is not established. It will be separate signs, without grammar.
One must also remeber that speech inthe hearing child develops in exactly the same way. No child speaks grammaatically correct sentences untilthey reach the stage of development oallowing for such. They begin with one word approximations, move onto two words, etc. This is a natural stage of develpment in language acquisition. To say that a child is not using grammatically correct ASL is not an indication that sign usage has stalled, but simply that it is progrssing as is developmentally epxected.

When a decision is made for CI, signs will be an important tool in order to stay in constant communication with the child, but in my experience, sign-"language" will might not evolve.
But it willcontinue to evelove with continued exposure.
It might stagnate at the level where the child prefers speech over sign. It will call you from another room, it will ask questions, and reply to questions with it's back turned to you. It will want to talk on the speakerphone with the grandparents, and with the normal phone later on.

Please, cloggy, perhaps it is cutural differences, but please refrain from referring to a child as "it". He/she is much mre appropriate and less offensive.
We went through these stages, and were happy to see that Lotte chose her own direction. For now, it is speech. Both in Dutch and Norwegian, and sign for her is something that does not have structure... For her signs are iconics. After all, that's how she used them just before she stopped using them...

But has she had continued exposure to more? The point is, and I am not criticizing you but simply offering suggestions......had she been exposed to consistent signing models, her sign would have continued to develop at the same rate as her speech, or possibly even faster. It is not neccesarily the lack of need that has stalled her signing, but lack of exposure. Without a proper model, or consistent exposure, she has no way to follow the developmental pathways awailable.

But the main thing is to have the communication. When we notice that she is not developing her speech, we might want to add cued speech (being closer to speech.) and if all fails we will add signs, and even sign-language.

There it is. That one statement conveys the message that speech is pereferable to sign, and if you believe that Lotte is not picking up on that attitude, you are sadly mistaken. As well, that is the belief that keeps the oral philosophy alive. The very philosophy that is responsible for the denial of adequate education for our deaf children and permits discrimination against signing deaf.
For now, we - as in us (the parents and siblings) and Lotte - use speech and it works well. With family, friends, and strangers....

I'm glad that it appears to be working well at this point in time. But I might ask, from whose perspective?

deafmama78 · 10-07-2007, 12:34 PM

I voted for sign language & speech.

R2D2 · 10-07-2007, 05:57 PM

I voted sign language and speech as well but I wouldn't use them simultaneously together as per traditional total communication. I would use them separately as you would if you were raising a bilingual child, because fluency is important and both languages are quite different in structure. The only way I'd combine them is with the "sandwich" method, for clarification purposes.

R2D2 · 10-07-2007, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angel

I'm very curious, who voted "sign language only" and why?...

I notice there are no votes for oral only.

**deafskeptic** · 10-07-2007, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by R2D2

I voted sign language and speech as well but I wouldn't use them simultaneously together as per traditional total communication. I would use them separately as you would if you were raising a bilingual child, because fluency is important and both languages are quite different in structure. The only way I'd combine them is with the "sandwich" method, for clarification purposes.

As would I. I don't like to speak and sign at the same time. The only time I do that is when I go to the Hearing Loss meeting where I live and that's for the sake of those late deafened or others who don't know sign.

**deafskeptic** · 10-07-2007, 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by R2D2

I notice there are no votes for oral only.

Yep. It's very telling.

**shel90** · 10-07-2007, 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cloggy

Deal !

Back on topic:
(BTW... why is there no "Speech Only" option ??)

Communication is the main thing. When a child cannot hear, sign will be the mode of communication (after touch and vision)
But remember that at the very young age, signlanguage or ASL is not established. It will be separate signs, without grammar.
When a decision is made for CI, signs will be an important tool in order to stay in constant communication with the child, but in my experience, sign-"language" will might not evolve. It might stagnate at the level where the child prefers speech over sign. It will call you from another room, it will ask questions, and reply to questions with it's back turned to you. It will want to talk on the speakerphone with the grandparents, and with the normal phone later on.
We went through these stages, and were happy to see that Lotte chose her own direction. For now, it is speech. Both in Dutch and Norwegian, and sign for her is something that does not have structure... For her signs are iconics. After all, that's how she used them just before she stopped using them...

But the main thing is to have the communication. When we notice that she is not developing her speech, we might want to add cued speech (being closer to speech.) and if all fails we will add signs, and even sign-language.
For now, we - as in us (the parents and siblings) and Lotte - use speech and it works well. With family, friends, and strangers....

That statement that I bolded is the root of the literacy problems that many deaf children have. Their parents have said the same thing as u and when signs are finally introduced the window for language development usually has passed and those children will always continue with language and literacy skills for the rest of their lives unless they work twice as hard as those deaf who have been exposed to both since birth stimilateanously. Unfortunately, most of them are so frustrated with learning and lose motivation.

**Angel** · 10-07-2007, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by R2D2

I notice there are no votes for oral only.

Yeah :smiling bigger:

**Liebling:-)))** · 10-07-2007, 11:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Angel

Yeah :smiling bigger:

jillio · 10-08-2007, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shel90

That statement that I bolded is the root of the literacy problems that many deaf children have. Their parents have said the same thing as u and when signs are finally introduced the window for language development usually has passed and those children will always continue with language and literacy skills for the rest of their lives unless they work twice as hard as those deaf who have been exposed to both since birth stimilateanously. Unfortunately, most of them are so frustrated with learning and lose motivation.

There it is! The statement that is resposnible for the language deprivation and undereducation of so many deaf childre.......If all else fails. And under it is the covert statement that speech is superior to sign. And then the question is posed, why do CI kids look down on signing, non- implanted kids? The answer is simple.....they have been taught to do so by the covert messages provided by their home environment.

deafdyke · 10-08-2007, 11:29 PM

Quote:

There it is. That one statement conveys the message that speech is pereferable to sign, and if you believe that Lotte is not picking up on that attitude, you are sadly mistaken. As well, that is the belief that keeps the oral philosophy alive.

Indeed, Cloggy. Although you and many other oralists are not "Oral is the best! Oral is the ONLY way "(like in the old days and like with a lot of oral extremists) you STILL have this attitude that Sign should only be for when speech methods aren't working.
Certainly Lotte doesn't NEED Sign, in the way kids who were deaf before CI, and who didn't benifit from HAs did. But the fact of the matter is that the gross majority of dhh kids are STRONG visual processors. Ignoring that fact, and just concentrating on speech only, is pretty much akin to taking a kid who's gifted in reading and writing, but not so good in math, and educating them by focusing solely on their math defiects!
Make sense now? Yes, some kids have done really really well and have gone very far orally...........BUT, MANY haven't. Maybe the reason why dhh people as a whole have not acheived too much, is b/c they've been denied the proper tools to REALLY honestly acheive.
As a whole dhh kids are underacheiving...............that's as a WHOLE.......that includes ORAL kids as well. It's NOT just TC kids.
Like if a dhh kid did oral only, they might just end up as an unskilled worker drone. (ie literate but not SKILLED) Whereas if they had other tools, they might become college professors, lawyers, doctors and so on!

View Poll Results: How communication method do you think deaf implanted children should use?
Cued speech and Speech communication a language development tool for deaf children.	0	0%
Sign Language and Speech (Any) (Total Communication)	36	94.74%
Sign Language Only	2	5.26%
Oral Method without Sign Language.	0	0%
I don't care either of the list above	0	0%
Voters: 38. You may not vote on this poll

10-02-2007, 06:51 AM	#38 (permalink)
Drew's Dad Registered User Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 227	[QUOTE=jillio;846173]Huh? No joke...I'm not sure what you are talking about.QUOTE] My apologies, I don't even remember what I was thinking last night. __________________ Drew received simultaneous, bilateral cochlear implants at 8 months of age. Read his story here! Visit Drew on YouTube

10-02-2007, 08:20 AM	#39 (permalink)
Angel ♥"Concrete Angel"♥ Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 19,089	I'm very curious, who voted "sign language only" and why?... __________________ "When we do the best we can, we never know what miracle is brought in our life, OR in the life of another." ~ Helen Keller

10-06-2007, 01:41 PM	#41 (permalink)
dreama Registered User Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: England Posts: 3,017	I vote sign and speech. Since I don't aprove of a child being implanted until they are old enough to make their own choice then they would be raised using sign language from 6 months onwards. They would also learn to read and write and speak using hearing aid or vibrating system (if HA didn't work) although it seems unfortunate that vibrating systems seem to be going out of busness thanks to CI. __________________ I speak for those who cannot speak for themselves. http://www.fightfoca.com/

10-07-2007, 01:53 AM	#42 (permalink)
Miss-Delectable V.I.P. Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 17,174 Blog Entries: 3	I agree with most of the posters on here. Using many tools to help your child is the best way to go instead of restricting to one tool. Too many parents didn't think about using a full toolbox, like deafdyke mentioned. __________________ "Walking with a friend in the dark is better than walking alone in the light." - Helen Keller

Today
Deafness	Sponsored Links __________________ This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members. Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

10-07-2007, 09:14 AM	#47 (permalink)
Cloggy Registered User Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Norway Posts: 4,706	Deal ! Back on topic: (BTW... why is there no "Speech Only" option ??) Communication is the main thing. When a child cannot hear, sign will be the mode of communication (after touch and vision) But remember that at the very young age, signlanguage or ASL is not established. It will be separate signs, without grammar. When a decision is made for CI, signs will be an important tool in order to stay in constant communication with the child, but in my experience, sign-"language" will might not evolve. It might stagnate at the level where the child prefers speech over sign. It will call you from another room, it will ask questions, and reply to questions with it's back turned to you. It will want to talk on the speakerphone with the grandparents, and with the normal phone later on. We went through these stages, and were happy to see that Lotte chose her own direction. For now, it is speech. Both in Dutch and Norwegian, and sign for her is something that does not have structure... For her signs are iconics. After all, that's how she used them just before she stopped using them... But the main thing is to have the communication. When we notice that she is not developing her speech, we might want to add cued speech (being closer to speech.) and if all fails we will add signs, and even sign-language. For now, we - as in us (the parents and siblings) and Lotte - use speech and it works well. With family, friends, and strangers.... __________________ . The limits of my language mean the limits of my world. . . . Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889 - 1951) Information about . . . . . . . . . Lotte Sofie . . . . . . . . . How the ear works . . . . . . . . . Parents info . . . . . . . . . Nonsense/ Myths about CI here or here.

10-07-2007, 12:34 PM	#51 (permalink)
deafmama78 Registered User Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Somewhere in the US. Posts: 419	I voted for sign language & speech. __________________ -DeafMama78 Implanted [right ear]: May 17, 2007 w/ Freedom! Activated: June 21, 2007 & lovin' it! Implanted [left ear]: May 8th, 2008 w/ Freedom! Activation: May 28th, 2008 Offically a bilateral CI'er!

10-07-2007, 05:57 PM	#52 (permalink)
R2D2 Registered User Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Australia Posts: 2,605	I voted sign language and speech as well but I wouldn't use them simultaneously together as per traditional total communication. I would use them separately as you would if you were raising a bilingual child, because fluency is important and both languages are quite different in structure. The only way I'd combine them is with the "sandwich" method, for clarification purposes. __________________ Left ear implanted 9th June 2006 Activated 29th June 2006 Right ear implanted 31st August 2007 Activated 18th September Both Nucleus Freedom Cochlear implant myths

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode