Parants of CI children.

[dreama]

You probably know what my views on CI are/were although they have softened a little since I started posting here. As I started off being totally against CI. Now I'd like to aproach things with more of an open mind and reserve judgement.

I'm just curious about a few things.
What reason you have for implanting your child. Do they know sign language before or after CI surgery? If your child asked if they could stop using their CI would you be ok about it?

 

[David]

You probably know what my views on CI are/were although they have softened a little since I started posting here. As I started off being totally against CI. Now I'd like to aproach things with more of an open mind and reserve judgement.

I'm just curious about a few things.
What reason you have for implanting your child. Do they know sign language before or after CI surgery? If your child asked if they could stop using their CI would you be ok about it?

I, personally, would NEVER implant my child. First of all, research proves that they are more prone to meningitis. Secondly, in my opinion, having the implant forces the child to integrate in a hearing society. Therefore, the implant will draw negative attention. Third, and most importantly, a deaf child, without an implant will perform as expected in the deaf culture. However, a deaf child with an implant will perform poorly in the hearing world. In my opinion, it is wrong to implant a child without the child being capable of making such decisions. I would let my child grow up deaf, in a deaf school, in a deaf culture. Later in life, when the child is old enough, if he/she decides to get an implant, then that's their choice.

 

[faire_jour]

I, personally, would NEVER implant my child. First of all, research proves that they are more prone to meningitis. Secondly, in my opinion, having the implant forces the child to integrate in a hearing society. Therefore, the implant will draw negative attention. Third, and most importantly, a deaf child, without an implant will perform as expected in the deaf culture. However, a deaf child with an implant will perform poorly in the hearing world. In my opinion, it is wrong to implant a child without the child being capable of making such decisions. I would let my child grow up deaf, in a deaf school, in a deaf culture. Later in life, when the child is old enough, if he/she decides to get an implant, then that's their choice.

1. Some children with CI'c are at higher risk for menegitis, because of the nature of their hearing loss (structural abnormalities, being prone to illness, etc)
2. My child is a member of the Deaf community and always (as long as it is my decision) will be. I am not "forcing her to integrate in hearing society".
3. Why is a unimplanted child BETTER than my child at being part of the Deaf community? That ios a ridiculous and offensive statement.
4. Also, what do you consider "performing poorly" in the hearing world? If my daughter is able to hear her name called so she will turn and look at me and see my signs, I would call that a success. And MANY MANY children with CI's do way more than that. I believe the stats for children implanted before age 4 are that 95% will develop intelligeble speech. That is a good result.
5. If you wait to implant until the child can make the choice, you ARE deciding. The longer the child is without auditory stimulation, the less successful they will be. If you decide to wait, you are insuring that it will not work as well. By saying no, you are choosing for them with your inaction.

 

[David]

1. Some children with CI'c are at higher risk for menegitis, because of the nature of their hearing loss (structural abnormalities, being prone to illness, etc)
2. My child is a member of the Deaf community and always (as long as it is my decision) will be. I am not "forcing her to integrate in hearing society".
3. Why is a unimplanted child BETTER than my child at being part of the Deaf community? That ios a ridiculous and offensive statement.
4. Also, what do you consider "performing poorly" in the hearing world? If my daughter is able to hear her name called so she will turn and look at me and see my signs, I would call that a success. And MANY MANY children with CI's do way more than that. I believe the stats for children implanted before age 4 are that 95% will develop intelligeble speech. That is a good result.
5. If you wait to implant until the child can make the choice, you ARE deciding. The longer the child is without auditory stimulation, the less successful they will be. If you decide to wait, you are insuring that it will not work as well. By saying no, you are choosing for them with your inaction.

"Dreama" asked my opinion of an issue; I gave my opinion. If you don't like it, don't read it again.

By the way, I am a CHES. If I made a factual statement, it is backed by research.

 

[faire_jour]

You probably know what my views on CI are/were although they have softened a little since I started posting here. As I started off being totally against CI. Now I'd like to aproach things with more of an open mind and reserve judgement.

I'm just curious about a few things.
What reason you have for implanting your child. Do they know sign language before or after CI surgery? If your child asked if they could stop using their CI would you be ok about it?

My daughter's primary language is ASL. She attends a bi-bi school for the Deaf. We are choosing to implant her because we want to give her all the opportunites available. We want to provide her access to sound and speech, and the CI is the best way to do that. She was born hearing and has been losing it quickly. She misses sound, and asks us why her toys no longer make sounds. It makes her sad. We are trying to give her a gift, not change her.

I don't believe technology is bad. It can be abused, and sometimes is, but that doesn't mean that the CI itself is bad. If my child chooses not to wear her CI later in life, I would have no problem with that. I know that I gave her the tools, and she chose her own path. I want to be able to look her in the eyes when she is an adult and know that I gave her everything that she could need to be successful.

My question is back to the Deaf community, I have said that I am fine with my daughter choosing to remove her CI and being voice-off as an adult, so my question to you is, is it ok for me to follow her lead if she chooses to stop signing???

 

[Pinky]

"Dreama" asked my opinion of an issue; I gave my opinion. If you don't like it, don't read it again.

By the way, I am a CHES. If I made a factual statement, it is backed by research.

See the bold. What is the word "CHES" mean?

 

[Hear Again]

I, personally, would NEVER implant my child. First of all, research proves that they are more prone to meningitis. Secondly, in my opinion, having the implant forces the child to integrate in a hearing society. Therefore, the implant will draw negative attention. Third, and most importantly, a deaf child, without an implant will perform as expected in the deaf culture. However, a deaf child with an implant will perform poorly in the hearing world. In my opinion, it is wrong to implant a child without the child being capable of making such decisions. I would let my child grow up deaf, in a deaf school, in a deaf culture. Later in life, when the child is old enough, if he/she decides to get an implant, then that's their choice.

David,

You said that a deaf child with a CI will perform poorly in the hearing world. That is a generalized statement and isn't true for children who are implanted at an early age. If, however, a child is implanted at age 8 or older, their chances for success with the CI are less than what would be expected if they had received an implant much earlier in life.

How do you see the CI as drawing negative attention? Many of the parents of CI children I've talked to say that the people they come in contact with are very interested in the CI and have positive things to say once they realize how well it helps the child function.

 

[Hear Again]

1. Some children with CI'c are at higher risk for menegitis, because of the nature of their hearing loss (structural abnormalities, being prone to illness, etc)
2. My child is a member of the Deaf community and always (as long as it is my decision) will be. I am not "forcing her to integrate in hearing society".
3. Why is a unimplanted child BETTER than my child at being part of the Deaf community? That ios a ridiculous and offensive statement.
4. Also, what do you consider "performing poorly" in the hearing world? If my daughter is able to hear her name called so she will turn and look at me and see my signs, I would call that a success. And MANY MANY children with CI's do way more than that. I believe the stats for children implanted before age 4 are that 95% will develop intelligeble speech. That is a good result.
5. If you wait to implant until the child can make the choice, you ARE deciding. The longer the child is without auditory stimulation, the less successful they will be. If you decide to wait, you are insuring that it will not work as well. By saying no, you are choosing for them with your inaction.

 

[David]

See the bold. What is the word "CHES" mean?

Certified Health Education Specialist

 

[sara1981]

its doesnt matter for my own child have become deaf or hearing somedays if i would chose CI or not.

IF im raise my own children somedays i would chose CI or not because i dont using CI when i was little girls.

im really wanted healthy baby as become deaf or hearing because im raise deaf since i was baby

 

[shel90]

1. Some children with CI'c are at higher risk for menegitis, because of the nature of their hearing loss (structural abnormalities, being prone to illness, etc)
2. My child is a member of the Deaf community and always (as long as it is my decision) will be. I am not "forcing her to integrate in hearing society".
3. Why is a unimplanted child BETTER than my child at being part of the Deaf community? That ios a ridiculous and offensive statement.
4. Also, what do you consider "performing poorly" in the hearing world? If my daughter is able to hear her name called so she will turn and look at me and see my signs, I would call that a success. And MANY MANY children with CI's do way more than that. I believe the stats for children implanted before age 4 are that 95% will develop intelligeble speech. That is a good result.
5. If you wait to implant until the child can make the choice, you ARE deciding. The longer the child is without auditory stimulation, the less successful they will be. If you decide to wait, you are insuring that it will not work as well. By saying no, you are choosing for them with your inaction.

I will never understand that cuz so many deaf people did fine with auditory stimulation before CIs were developed. I am one of them so I dont understand the view that without CIs, the deaf child will never gain any benefits auditoritally.

 

[deafdyke]

We are choosing to implant her because we want to give her all the opportunites available. We want to provide her access to sound and speech, and the CI is the best way to do that. She was born hearing and has been losing it quickly. She misses sound, and asks us why her toys no longer make sounds. It makes her sad. We are trying to give her a gift, not change her.

GREAT POST!!! Many of those who are against CI don't understand that for kids, the qualifications for being implanted are stricter then for adults. Many kids who get implanted aren't doing well with traditional amplification. They need more input!

 

[WhisperHorse]

*sighs* I'm pretty much same with David. I would NEVER have my children to get CI even if Im deaf or not. (actually, Im deaf in real life tho). Unless they ask for CI and I would admit and support no matter what if they wants it, not anybody wants, JUST THEM who wants that's it.

Even, my mother's father, my own grandfather, who want me to having CI but doctor saved my life which he stopped my mother to not allow me to getting a CI because; it could effect me becomes retard, CI will NEVER works for me once I get it and I will not able to hear at all. There's many doctors that I went to see and they says that I'm very, very DEAF than everybody who are deaf that they ever met, they are VERY doubt that CI even in present will be work for me.

That part, I'm afraid for my own children if I have a deaf kid myself. I prefer to test them first before decide to having them CI because never know if CI will never work for them or people. My opinion that it's silly, Im sorry everybody. I am very happy for you guys who have ci which are work for you guys, you are truly lucky but for me, Im not lucky tho.

 

[Macian]

ok lets start afresh, I have just been implanted, it's very early days and so far i have had very little gains, so I'm not about preaching what you can achieve, as i haven't yet got there, I am not a kid, I'm married with one son, who, if was deaf i would give him the best choices available for him to get on with life.
but most of people are without a disability are full hearing, which makes the biggest percentage, to get forward in life withought the need to be included in a small minority, which very often is shallow and opinionated(as some of your own posts more than prove), even petty, in such a small world with such restrictions, where can you go if ye can't mix in with the rest of the world, or don't agree with the seemily dictorship of the Deaf world, you seem to leave no room for people who want to embrace both, humans are all about adventure, reaching out for as much as you can,all some of the small minded Deaf want is to restrict their kids to a small island of oppinionated people, in fear of their own isolation want to interr their own kin to keep it going, now how sad is that, it terms of evolution you wouldnt have survived the dinosuars! if not for the society that is funding you, the very one who you rebel against and try to stop you kids from joining.

 

[Hear Again]

*sighs* I'm pretty much same with David. I would NEVER have my children to get CI even if Im deaf or not. (actually, Im deaf in real life tho). Unless they ask for CI and I would admit and support no matter what if they wants it, not anybody wants, JUST THEM who wants that's it.

Even, my mother's father, my own grandfather, who want me to having CI but doctor saved my life which he stopped my mother to not allow me to getting a CI because; it could effect me becomes retard, CI will NEVER works for me once I get it and I will not able to hear at all. There's many doctors that I went to see and they says that I'm very, very DEAF than everybody who are deaf that they ever met, they are VERY doubt that CI even in present will be work for me.

That part, I'm afraid for my own children if I have a deaf kid myself. I prefer to test them first before decide to having them CI because never know if CI will never work for them or people. My opinion that it's silly, Im sorry everybody. I am very happy for you guys who have ci which are work for you guys, you are truly lucky but for me, Im not lucky tho.

WhisperHorse,

I'm confused by the bolded statements above. Could you explain?

Also, have you talked to a CI surgeon about implants? The reason I ask is because "ordinary" ENTs often do not understand CIs, how they work or the candidacy criteria for CI.

 

[LadySekhmet]

I will never understand that cuz so many deaf people did fine with auditory stimulation before CIs were developed. I am one of them so I dont understand the view that without CIs, the deaf child will never gain any benefits auditoritally.

I agree totally. Hearing aids DID help me for the 28 years of my life. But unfortunately, it just got worse. I grew up with "hearing" sounds, so to have that shut down on me was something that I could not live without. Hence why I got the CI.

*IF* I grew up completely deaf, without any hearing aids whatsoever, then that's a totally different story. There are deaf people that I have met that never ever heard anything in their life, and they live just fine. I can't.

I would say one of the first requirements for ADULTS to get CI is that they MUST have at least some experience with auditory stimulation before being implanted. If you don't stimulate your ears or nerves, you would be in a huge shock when you're activated. It's just that simple.

For children - it is a bit stricter. However, the responsibilities of a child's success falls on the parents. My audiologist have seen parents not come back after the child was activated and have a few mappings. It's not how it works. A implanted child should never just get the implant and now they survive the hearing world. Unfortunately, those type of situations give CI children a bad rap.

I always feel that Parents do not do enough research or know enough about CIs...they just rely on the doctor's opinions. (and yes, pretty much all of them are clueless about Deaf culture/Deaf World/Deaf Education).

Just because a child has CI doesn't mean he/she will be better than if she/he didn't have it. If a CI is just being used as a "technology" to help them hear...that's fine by me. That's why I can see that Faire-Jour would be a great Parent advocate for parents who implanted their children. She will still use ASL, still get involved in the deaf culture. I just don't understand why people are bashing about that. Who cares?

 

[shel90]

I agree totally. Hearing aids DID help me for the 28 years of my life. But unfortunately, it just got worse. I grew up with "hearing" sounds, so to have that shut down on me was something that I could not live without. Hence why I got the CI.

*IF* I grew up completely deaf, without any hearing aids whatsoever, then that's a totally different story. There are deaf people that I have met that never ever heard anything in their life, and they live just fine. I can't.

I would say one of the first requirements for ADULTS to get CI is that they MUST have at least some experience with auditory stimulation before being implanted. If you don't stimulate your ears or nerves, you would be in a huge shock when you're activated. It's just that simple.

For children - it is a bit stricter. However, the responsibilities of a child's success falls on the parents. My audiologist have seen parents not come back after the child was activated and have a few mappings. It's not how it works. A implanted child should never just get the implant and now they survive the hearing world. Unfortunately, those type of situations give CI children a bad rap.

I always feel that Parents do not do enough research or know enough about CIs...they just rely on the doctor's opinions. (and yes, pretty much all of them are clueless about Deaf culture/Deaf World/Deaf Education).

Just because a child has CI doesn't mean he/she will be better than if she/he didn't have it. If a CI is just being used as a "technology" to help them hear...that's fine by me. That's why I can see that Faire-Jour would be a great Parent advocate for parents who implanted their children. She will still use ASL, still get involved in the deaf culture. I just don't understand why people are bashing about that. Who cares?

Right...with my HAs, I feel I can understand how sound works and can even imagine different musical tones.

 

[faire_jour]

I don't understand that either. I am one also. But according to Faire Jour, neither you nor I can speak here.

I never said that speech wasn't able to be developed. There is a difference between being able to produce and being able understand what is coming in. The goal of a CI and AVT is to have a child be able to comprehend using sound only, no visual cues at all. I am saying that most profoundly deaf people who use hearing aids are unable to do that. That is the auditory stimulation I am talking about.

 

[rick48]

I will never understand that cuz so many deaf people did fine with auditory stimulation before CIs were developed. I am one of them so I dont understand the view that without CIs, the deaf child will never gain any benefits auditoritally.

Sorry you are incapabale of understading what the research and studies as well as personal obersavations have long established: that the sooner a person is implanted after the onset of deafness, the more likelihood that the person will benefit from the ci.


No one here is saying that non-ci deaf children will never gain auditory benefits without a ci but that for profoundly deaf children who do not derive any benefits from HAs there is no better way for those children to develop and understand speech than a ci.

Once again, you attempt to make any discussion a referendum on your life experience, get over it Shel it is not about you.

Why are you even posting in this thread? You are neither a ci user or the parent of a ci child. Is it just to start/continue controversry?

 

[rick48]

I never said that speech wasn't able to be developed. There is a difference between being able to produce and being able understand what is coming in. The goal of a CI and AVT is to have a child be able to comprehend using sound only, no visual cues at all. I am saying that most profoundly deaf people who use hearing aids are unable to do that. That is the auditory stimulation I am talking about.

faire jour,

Correct and I understand what you are saying. My profoundly daughter was unable, even with the most powerful HAs and FM auditory trainers, to either understand or to develop speech.
Rick