deafgal001

Wirelessly posted

Yes and I don't know how much profit CI companies make anyway

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

cjg

but it is also not deaf.

where is the line .. Previously in this thread someone stated it as "ability to understand speech"

Does the lack of the ability to understand whispers across a crowded room define deaf even if the person is not a CI user ??Why does that lack bring the CI user under the definition of deaf ? The performance level is the same.

faire_jour

I'm sure you can find out. They are publicly traded companies.

deafgal001

Wirelessly posted

Too lazy.

Actually I'm not on my computer

TXgolfer

Good point....I am starting to question my audi.....

__________________
Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. - Romans 12:21


Sometimes at night, I see their faces. I feel the traces they've left on my soul

faire_jour

Her profound hearing loss does. If someone can run and win a race using a prosthetic leg, does that make him not an amputee? No, it means his prosthetics work very well.

AlleyCat

I'm curious, cjg ... Why are you so hell-bent on the definition of deaf? Either we (or our children) feel we are, or we aren't. What's it to you? Why 60+ posts fighting on what deaf is?

kokonut

This is pathetically dumb.

__________________
Before AD.

After AD.

"Restriction on free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us."
-Thurgood Marshall, former Supreme Court Justice


"... turns out they are telling the truth."

deafbajagal

TXgolfer

Who cares?

__________________
Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. - Romans 12:21


Sometimes at night, I see their faces. I feel the traces they've left on my soul

cjg

Cant compare the two ..

The word amputee reefers to the amputation .. that is a fact that can never change.

This would be more analogous to the term "legless" Which yes .. while using the prosthetic the user is no longer "legless"

cjg

I am simply trying to understand why some level of performance is classified as deaf simply because the person is using a CI.

if the performance is the same as a non CI user .. why is the term still deaf.

And I am not talking about culture. about the technical term.

deafgal001

Wirelessly posted

I'm sorry to say but you can not change the fact that someone is deaf.

deafbajagal

*deafbajagal talking to herself* Hmm, a classic example of the idiom "falling on deaf ears"...

cjg

So .. as technology progresses if/and/or/when a CI is invented that restores hearing completely .. the user will still be deaf ?

Previously in this thread it was presented that the line between deaf / not deaf is "the ability to discriminate speech".

Are you saying that the line can only be passed one way ? from not deaf to deaf. That it can never be passed the other ??

deafgal001

Wirelessly posted

I understand that you think profound hearing loss would suit better for CI users because you relate deaf as no hearing as legless as no leg. But people prefer to refer deaf because that who they are.

deafgal001

Wirelessly posted

Actually I think people would call themselves deaf if they were cured. They remember what it was it like to be deaf. They'll cherish it always.

cjg

That is referring to the term Deaf as a cultural term ( The deaf / used as a noun ) .. I am speaking of the technical /descriptive term ( used as an adjective ) .. Capital D vs small d

deafgal001

Wirelessly posted

Of course. I've always told people that communication is our heart and soul. So Its nearly impossible to look at it from a medical view of deafness only.

cjg

Yet my question still remains ..

Why would ( should ) a CI / HA user still technically be classified as deaf it they can perform at a level above which a non CI / HA user would not be technically classified as deaf.

To expand ..

a non HA /CI user that has a pure tone test and hits 30db across the board .. and a HINT score of 70% is not technically classified as deaf.

Why would a CI / HA user be classified that way if they can score the same.

Why can someone "become deaf" due to a score on a test .. Yet can not "become not deaf" when they achieve the same score.

why is the use of a HA / CI a factor in deaf/not deaf ? I have yet to find a dictionary that includes the phrase "natural hearing" in its definition of deaf.

What about a middle ear implant that replaces the bones between the ear drum and the cochlear would a user of that device still be considered deaf if they were able to understand speech ( the line which was presented previously to break between deaf/ not deaf )

The line between blind / not blind can be passed both ways.. Why not deaf ?

faire_jour

Wirelessly posted

except that it is a good comparison. My daughter had hearing and then it was damaged. She had fully functioning hair cells, and then they were destroyed. She now has a cochlear prosthetic device that gives her some hearing. Her hair cells have NOT been restored. She is still deaf and wears a device.

cjg

That is a point of semantics .. The word amputee means "someone that has had an amputation" it really can not be used to make an analogy here. Because the line between amputee and not amputee is having had an "amputation" .. that can technically never be undone .. Even a star fish that grows back its leg would still technically be considered an amputee

Even if the leg was removed and reattached and they have full use of it, technically the term amputee would still apply.

deaf refers to the lack ( partial lack ) of the sense of hearing. If someones sense of hearing is restored , by whatever means , why would the term deaf still apply? Why is the restoring via a CI / HA matter .. if the functional level of the restoration brings it back above whatever line separates a non deaf person from a deaf person.

not specifically about your daughter .. but try and think in more general terms.

this may be more of a philosophical question that may never be actually answered.

kokonut

Oh brother...

__________________
Before AD.

After AD.

"Restriction on free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us."
-Thurgood Marshall, former Supreme Court Justice


"... turns out they are telling the truth."

Frisky Feline

Denial of having the deaf term?

shel90

Oh yea...I just cant understand conversations in large group settings hence my problems at school.

That's where ASL would have been a lifesaver for me especially during classroom discussions or teachers walking around the room talking.

__________________
"Wine improves with age. The older I get, the better I like it."

--- Anonymous

TXgolfer

Thx....I have got to get mine checked.....something is not right.

__________________
Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. - Romans 12:21


Sometimes at night, I see their faces. I feel the traces they've left on my soul

Hohtopics

Maybe it's cause of statements such as ""Deaf people can do anything but hear" that help to purport that stereotype.

Hohtopics

Maybe it's some of you that would go "Uh-oh " in five or six years as science and technology continues to improve...

Hohtopics

And things are "a bed of roses" for those that only rely on ASL?

Hohtopics

And the culturally Deaf does not also have any whatsoever desire to also make money in their own way...?