R2D2

Before we had our CIs, both Deafskeptic and I suffered from recruitment. This meant that the nerve hair damage was so bad we couldn't even put our hearing aids on without suffering pain and the worst tinnitus. The CI bypassed this. So the difference between HA and CI in that case was huge. My speech sentence testing recognition without lipreading went from 0% to 80%+ within a year.

However, to compare my HAs before onset of recruitment to now with my CI, I'd have to say that the biggest difference is being able to use the telephone. I couldn't do that before. Speech sounds clearer and closer - it's less hard work to listen generally. It feels more like you have a smaller hearing loss, if you know what I mean.
Having said that, I don't think I would have been prepared to sacrifice that residual hearing at that point though as it was still useful and there was always the small chance I would not benefit from the CI. But by the time I suffered my sudden loss, I felt that my residual hearing was worthless and useless and I was very okay with giving it up.

__________________


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

Deafness

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

flip

I have seen families using AVT at home, but it did not work out, even with early implants. Some of those children have crappy speech and crappy sign. It's sad and could be avoided if early ASL was provided, too. Too much russian roulette going on here.

flip

Yes, it makes perfect sense. The big question is who do best, those raised bilingual bimodal or oral, with CI. An editorial article in journal of deaf studies and deaf education last summer replied this question, in favor of bimodal bilingual based on all research done the last years.

Those findings we see here is curcial for audiologist and the CI industry, but not the most successful methods for prelingual deaf people, according to JDSDE.

R2D2

I think we are going a bit OT here. This discussion is mainly about those deaf adults who have already been successful with AVT via HA means early on who then managed to transfer their skills to the use of the CI.

The debate as to the best model for babies/children starting from scratch deserves another thread really, because they are yet to acquire language and they are a different group from us adults.

__________________


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

deafskeptic

I can speak on the phone with my family and I never could do that with my HA. I also can understand most of what I listen to on the radio. Recently, I've been able to understand PA systems in stores; I didn't even realiaze that's what I was listening to at first because the sounds were so much clearer. Before I got implanted, about the only thing I could have told you about the speakers was if they were male or female.

I couldn't hear the high pitched sounds from motors so it took me a while to relearn the sounds. Ditto for sounds like s or sh.

__________________
Left ear implanted with Med-El on April 24 2007.
Activated on May 9th.

flip

You are right, I misread some posts here. We don't need more threads going off topic, so thanks for the reminder

shel90

That is what I have been telling them for a long time. Too much Russian roulette going on with these kids' language development. It is just not fair since hearing kids are not being put in that kind of position.

__________________
~Shel~

"A child educated only at school is an uneducated child." -George Santayana

jillio

And what is so worng about AVT is that it forces a child to survive through the use of their weakest sense and creates untold languge delays. What is so wonderful about covering your mouth when you speak to a deaf child, or turning your head so they are unable to speech read?

rick48

Implanting a child as soon as possible after the onset of deafness and then providing that child with the appropriate oral speech and language therapy along with involved and dedicated parents is a far cry from "russian roulette" as this parent and other parents of ci kids will tell you.

__________________

Restoring the universe to order will have to wait until next season.

shel90

Sorry to burst your bubble but it hasnt worked for all implanted children. What happens? They become delayed in language due to not having a visual access to language. U can tell me over and over again the same thing but I will never believe it until all deaf children have full access to language and dont end up with language delays. This is going to be my view and I will always stick to it..I believe in giving all children all tools not just one. Until then, it is still playing Russian Roulette.

__________________
~Shel~

"A child educated only at school is an uneducated child." -George Santayana

jillio

Agreed. The one most important variable that the oralists continue to leave out is the child themselves. Magnuson (2000), Laybert & Hondt (2003), Evans (2004), Azar, (1998), LaSasso (2002), Marschark, Rhoten, & Fabich (2006), Miyamoto, et.al. (2003), Mukari, et.al. (2007), Priesler, et.al. (2002), Damen, et.al. (2006), and Peterson, (2004) are but a few of the researchers who agree that the children who perform best are those exposed to both sign and speech.

Likewise, the research in the OP dealt with a small sample of postlingually deafened adults. It simply isn't applicable to prelingually deafened children.

deafdyke

Rick *slams head against wall*
You have ONLY seen the sucesses. You have NOT seen the kids who are just paddling along in the pool, doing "OK, but not as good as they COULD"
The population you're exposed to has been VERY elite.