Man loses HA, can't afford $2500 HA but wants $50,000 CI!

DeafDC Blog Cochlear Implants or Hearing Aids?

I talked about people who make insurance pony up $50,000 to buy them a CI because they can't or won't pay $2500 for a high end HA! That is so immoral! It makes me mad because we pay for this with higher insurance rates! :roll:

What he can do is get an audiogram, do the math and get a free 60 day trial of the best HA(s) if he derives at least some benefits from powerful HAs, he should save money and buy a HA. Look on ebay for used HAs and low end HAs(avoid sound amplifiers) those will be a cheap stopgap measure and youll at least hear *something* till you can save up for a powerful HA.

CI is reserved for the profoundly deaf with no or very, very little residual hearing. For those people, a CI can be great in providing access to sounds and sometimes even speech. You take a risk of surgery and all other associated risks, you kiss your residual hearing goodbye(no going back to HAs) and you risk hearing worse than HA if you still have plenty of residual hearing(60db, 70db, even 80db HL) a powerful HA can very easily aid you to 25db or better. At 500Hz my loss is 85db, but I hear 20db aided.

I agree. I knew a lot of people who got cochlear implants because their insurance covered it. They were like, "I don't care, my insurance is paying for it. If I don't like it, I'll just stop wearing them!" At least half of those who acted like this, actually stopped wearing their CIs within a few months of wearing them. :roll:

I asked one guy why he stopped wearing it. He said he didn't care.

I asked one woman why she stopped wearing it. She said her girlfriend thought she looked better without it.

I asked one guy why he stopped wearing it. He said that he wanted to socialize with the deafies more.

I asked one woman why she stopped wearing it. She said it looked ugly on her.

Seriously, why are they wasting those insurance companies time with these cochlear implants? :roll:

Please report those people to the insurance company. The insurance needs to sue those people for the $50,000 costs incurred. In the future, anyone that wants a CI needs to first see a psychologist and get evaluated to ensure they are sincerne about sticking with a CI or if they are just playing around.

Insurance also needs to weed out those who cheat, those who aren't wearing the best HAs, those who aren't serious about CI, those who buy into the CI hype, etc.

Insurance is insurance. Either you take it or leave it.

Besides, you should be aware that insurance companies are more than willing to pay for cochlear implants than they are for hearing aids.

That is exactly what happened to Jamie Burke
Cochlear Implants - My Cochlear Implant Story (and don't forget to click on part two of this link)

It is the greed of insurance companies. Many people became hard of hearing due to age or other reasons and they don't want to cover hearing aids. I don't understand why they would cover CI unless they think it is going to be few who want CI. Once an insurance turned me down because they think I would ask for CI and drop the insurance once I got it. Funny, they would insure hearing people who would go for CI if they lose hearing but not the deaf people who don't care for CI. They should charge hearing people higher rate because they are more likely to want CI for their deaf child.

VamPyroX said:

I agree. I knew a lot of people who got cochlear implants because their insurance covered it. They were like, "I don't care, my insurance is paying for it. If I don't like it, I'll just stop wearing them!" At least half of those who acted like this, actually stopped wearing their CIs within a few months of wearing them. :roll:

I asked one guy why he stopped wearing it. He said he didn't care.

I asked one woman why she stopped wearing it. She said her girlfriend thought she looked better without it.

I asked one guy why he stopped wearing it. He said that he wanted to socialize with the deafies more.

I asked one woman why she stopped wearing it. She said it looked ugly on her.

Seriously, why are they wasting those insurance companies time with these cochlear implants? :roll:

Click to expand...

Unbelievable!!! Slowly shaking my head...sadly at that.

I sure didn't get mine to see if I liked it or not. And I certainly don't care how it looks on me either. I got it so I could hear again plain and simple.

Beyond all that, I have a hard time understanding anybody getting this kind of surgery on a lark.

You're kidding me.

Also, hearing aid dispensers are also to blame. They'll carry and push the latest digital technology like no tomorrow because they get commission off of it.

They certainly don't seem to care to help you hear the best you can with the technology that's right for you.

He can spend $500 on one of the best possible analog hearing aids and he doesn't have to go through Cochlear Implant Surgery or destroy his residual hearing.

Why do these idiot people have to go through the most expensive solutions, when the simplest, least expensive solution is available?!?!?!

If a hearing aid could help me in my dead left ear, I would jump at the chance to get one.

Phi4Sius said:

You're kidding me.

Also, hearing aid dispensers are also to blame. They'll carry and push the latest digital technology like no tomorrow because they get commission off of it.

They certainly don't seem to care to help you hear the best you can with the technology that's right for you.

He can spend $500 on one of the best possible analog hearing aids and he doesn't have to go through Cochlear Implant Surgery or destroy his residual hearing.

Why do these idiot people have to go through the most expensive solutions, when the simplest, least expensive solution is available?!?!?!

If a hearing aid could help me in my dead left ear, I would jump at the chance to get one.

Click to expand...

I feel sorry for alot of people who aren't hearing the best they should. They need to shop at different audiologists and insist on having their HAs reprogrammed. I did and now I hear much better. Phi4sius hears much better with a different HA. Many people who get CI, I honestly feel they didn't put enough time and effort into HAs and just want a quick fix paid by Mr. Insurance.

Phi4Sius said:

You're kidding me.

Also, hearing aid dispensers are also to blame. They'll carry and push the latest digital technology like no tomorrow because they get commission off of it.

They certainly don't seem to care to help you hear the best you can with the technology that's right for you.

He can spend $500 on one of the best possible analog hearing aids and he doesn't have to go through Cochlear Implant Surgery or destroy his residual hearing.

Why do these idiot people have to go through the most expensive solutions, when the simplest, least expensive solution is available?!?!?!

If a hearing aid could help me in my dead left ear, I would jump at the chance to get one.

Click to expand...

I agree with you.

I would think that insurance companies would rather save money on a hearing aid than a cochlear implant. If the customer can provide proof from an audiologist that the only way out was to get cochlear implants, fine.

However, I have seen some audiologists try to encourage their clients to get cochlear implants. I later found out that these audiologists had a contract with some CI companies and were getting bonuses for referral. :roll:

VamPyroX said:

I agree with you.

I would think that insurance companies would rather save money on a hearing aid than a cochlear implant. If the customer can provide proof from an audiologist that the only way out was to get cochlear implants, fine.

However, I have seen some audiologists try to encourage their clients to get cochlear implants. I later found out that these audiologists had a contract with some CI companies and were getting bonuses for referral. :roll:

Click to expand...

I know a bunch of people who were encouraged to get a CI from their audiologist. That's fine if you have no(or very, very little) residual hearing otherwise see a different audiologist who respects HA technology and is willing to correctly program your HAs so you hear better and perhaps as well as what others hear with CI.

I doubt people pay a higher premium because of this. The costs of cochlear implants hardly leave a dent in the industry because we are a minority. It's the surgeries such as heart surgeries, diabetes, autism, handicap-related therapy, car collision-related injuries, rehabilitation programs, the list goes on and on. They are far more common than cochlear implants ever will be.

I understand this

I understand this gentleman's feelings, because I have had them myself. I have been told by my Ent that at somepoint in the future I will probably need a CI (In no hurry for that to happen, I just got my first pair of digital HA's and love them). He has lost one of his HA's and is most likely totally losing it right now. I would suggest to him to first look into getting some sort of assistance in replaceing his HA and then (I dont think there as any mention of the level of his loss) get his hearing evaluated by an audi to see what optoins HA, CI or someother approach may work out best for him.

I read this article about two years ago and my first reaction was 'Whoa, if a hearing aid works and you are happy with it why bother with a CI"

From the article it is obvious the author has a hearing loss in the severe to profound range. (i.e. oddly flucuating voice). The blog is also the DeafDC blog. He just might be helped by an implant, but, getting a implant just because the insurance will pay for the implant and not the HA. When one is evaluated for a CI the audiologist will ask questions about why you want a CI. If someone answered "My insurance will pay for it", the audiologist would question whether they are serious about it. The author also mentions that he likes to take the path of least resistance and the least amount of time. The audiologist might find the author unrealistic as well. You have to be patient with a CI because it takes time to get the proper programming and for the brain to adjust.

It is a shame insurance does not pay for hearing aids. My credit cards have just recovered from buying over $8000 in HAs within 6 years. I don't think insurance companies will ever completely cover HAs there are far more people who need hearing aids than people who would qualify for a CI.

If everyone is really concerned about the cost of health care the best thing we can do is get off our fat butts and exercise, eat better and make sure our Blood Pressure is not high. CIs are expensive but only a small part of health care costs.

Why do these idiot people have to go through the most expensive solutions, when the simplest, least expensive solution is available?!?!?!

If a hearing aid could help me in my dead left ear, I would jump at the chance to get one.

Click to expand...

Phi.....I totally agree! There ARE a lot of people out there who opt for implants as a last resort thing......but there also seems to be a sizable minority (note I said MINORITY) who feel like they NEED the latest techno-gizmo to hear really well. I think a lot of those people are a) auditory-verbal/AG Bell types who have been taught that they NEED the latest hearing aid. Getting the latest hearing aid is actually one of the practices of an Auditory verbal methodology, or people with quite a bit of residual hearing who think that the CI magicly overcomes the disadvantages of being hoh.

It is so crazy that he would undergo that because he cannot afford hearing aids! At my last Audi appointment he had talked to me about the possibility of getting CI's because I became eligible. But I have GREAT power digital aids that help me SOOOO much! I had this guy bugging me forever (until I blocked him) about getting the ball rolling on CI's. WHICH at some point I will because I know they will help me. I will not get them till I absolutely HAVE to.AND, I just spent 5600.00 on a new set of aids and the 3000 something odd difference between the HAs my old Audi gave me that I had to trade in cause he screwed me over (they were 5000 but when I went to the new place I got a 40% trade in when I needed the stronger, powerful ones)
Insurance companies SUCK! I sure hope that at some point they start paying. Mine called mine cosmetic and its ridiculous that they can say that.

candybrowneyes said:

It is so crazy that he would undergo that because he cannot afford hearing aids! At my last Audi appointment he had talked to me about the possibility of getting CI's because I became eligible. But I have GREAT power digital aids that help me SOOOO much! I had this guy bugging me forever (until I blocked him) about getting the ball rolling on CI's. WHICH at some point I will because I know they will help me. I will not get them till I absolutely HAVE to.AND, I just spent 5600.00 on a new set of aids and the 3000 something odd difference between the HAs my old Audi gave me that I had to trade in cause he screwed me over (they were 5000 but when I went to the new place I got a 40% trade in when I needed the stronger, powerful ones)
Insurance companies SUCK! I sure hope that at some point they start paying. Mine called mine cosmetic and its ridiculous that they can say that.

Click to expand...

I agree! At the least, insurance should pay up for two HAs for those who would qualify for a CI anyway. Itll save them a fortune!

I'm totally sympathetic with the arguments for insurance companies to provide HAs for folks who need them. I used to have a HA and had to pay for them myself. So, I know all about that...

Saying all that however, I know why they don't and it is simple economics. There are far more people who need HAs than those who could use a CI. If the typical HA costs about $2000 a pop and rising (some people need two) and a CI will cost $6000 (not counting the one time cost of surgery) then everything makes sense. Insurance companies are well aware of the numbers and think there is no way that they want to be held liable for all those folks who need a HA. Consider the fact that the population is aging as well and that means more HAs all around.

Be careful, CI does not always give good hearing. For those with residual hearing, the safe option is to get powerful HAs. I can understand if you have no or minimum residual hearing.



This person hears around 50db with CI. However this person had no or minimum residual hearing, see downward arrows on audiogram. I would take 50db with CI over complete silence. However it's probably worse than what I hear with powerful HAs.

Yes some people with CI do end up hearing better than what they hear with HAs but it's a huge risk, especially if you have alot of residual hearing. Deafdyke and I agree that CI is great technology for excellent candidates(aka no hearing) but "ambiguous borderline" candidates need to think long and hard about their risky choice. As my audiologist says "a CI might help but if you end up hearing worse, there's no going back to HAs. Therefore I don't recommend CI at this time."

deafdude1 said:

Yes some people with CI do end up hearing better than what they hear with HAs but it's a huge risk, especially if you have alot of residual hearing. Deafdyke and I agree that CI is great technology for excellent candidates(aka no hearing) but "ambiguous borderline" candidates need to think long and hard about their risky choice. As my audiologist says "a CI might help but if you end up hearing worse, there's no going back to HAs. Therefore I don't recommend CI at this time."

Click to expand...

Not some, ALMOST ALL.

Maybe some don't like the sounds they are getting from a CI, and choose not to use it, but 50% of hearing aids purchased are never used. Does that mean they don't work? No. It is a personal choice to stop using them.

I think that satisfaction with CI's are around 90%, way better than hearing aids.

I really have never met a soul who heard better with hearing aids than they now do with a CI. Maybe there are a few cases floating around, but it is truely rare.

faire_jour said:

Not some, ALMOST ALL.

...

I think that satisfaction with CI's are around 90%, way better than hearing aids.

I really have never met a soul who heard better with hearing aids than they now do with a CI. Maybe there are a few cases floating around, but it is truely rare.

Click to expand...

I agree with the first point.

I dunno about the 90% bit. Maybe less than that say 75-80% and that is for a variety of reasons.

I would be hard pressed to believe anybody hears with a HA better than a CI. This assumes one qualifies for a CI in the first place. Not somebody with 70% of hearing left.