Some thoughts?

[Jiro]

People tell themselves that to make themselves feel better. If you wait until they are old enough to decide for themselves, you have made a decision. You have decided that they will not have the benefit of young implantation. You have decided that they will remain without auditory stimulation for two decades. You have decided to make the aural rehab (if they decide to do it) infinitely more difficult. By deciding to wait, you are deciding.

correct me if I'm wrong but I think that story is spinned by CI companies.

 

[faire_jour]

And Deaf of Deaf are actually the ones that do not suffer language delays, and function academically on par with their hearing peers. Since the whole purpose of the CI is remediate these problems, it is not needed if the problems aren't occurring.

And, after all, isn't it all about parental choice, not just the parental choice that agrees with yours?

Just saying that is why I said 20 years.

 

[jillio]

Just saying that is why I said 20 years.

18 is not 20.

 

[faire_jour]

correct me if I'm wrong but I think that story is spinned by CI companies.

I think the research back it up. Children who are implanted generally score higher on word recognition tests than pre-lingually deaf adults implanted as adults.

 

[jillio]

I think the research back it up. Children who are implanted generally score higher on word recognition tests than pre-lingually deaf adults implanted as adults.

And your point is? Word recognition has a very low correlation to language development and critical thought. All it indicates is discrimination ability.

 

[faire_jour]

And your point is? Word recognition has a very low correlation to language development and critical thought. All it indicates is discrimination ability.

That's because the point of a CI is for increased speech/sound discrimination. Therefore those who hear better are scoring better. I was answering the question about whether or not kids implanted do better than adults implanted.

 

[Jiro]

I think the research back it up. Children who are implanted generally score higher on word recognition tests than pre-lingually deaf adults implanted as adults.

you think? that doesn't sound very reassuring. All roads lead to CI companies' agenda

 

[faire_jour]

you think? that doesn't sound very reassuring. All roads lead to CI companies' agenda

I don't understand? If the research shows they do better, why assume it is an agenda? They do better, that is what matters.

I think that if you want to believe that "audist" have a agenda, you need to look at the "manualists" agenda too.

 

[jillio]

That's because the point of a CI is for increased speech/sound discrimination. Therefore those who hear better are scoring better. I was answering the question about whether or not kids implanted do better than adults implanted.

Just because they can discriminate some words better does not necessarily mean that they are functioning better in the real world. It just means that in a contolled environment, they can discriminate a few words.

 

[jillio]

you think? that doesn't sound very reassuring. All roads lead to CI companies' agenda

There you go!

 

[faire_jour]

Just because they can discriminate some words better does not necessarily mean that they are functioning better in the real world. It just means that in a contolled environment, they can discriminate a few words.

Do you have anything to back up your claim that prelingually deaf adults implanted as adults do as well or better than children implanted young?

 

[Hear Again]

Just because they can discriminate some words better does not necessarily mean that they are functioning better in the real world. It just means that in a contolled environment, they can discriminate a few words.

This is true. I may be a little off-topic here, but as an adult CI user, I'm able to understand words relatively well in quiet. However, when you add in background noise, my comphrension goes down several percentages. I would think the same concept would apply to children with CIs.

 

[shel90]

Guess the moral of the thread is that hearing people have it better than deaf people in life so try to make deaf children as much like hearing children.

 

[Jiro]

I don't understand? If the research shows they do better, why assume it is an agenda? They do better, that is what matters.

What cast a doubt for me in this is you saying "I think....." so no it does not matter at all if the research is conducted by CI and/or audi in CI's pocket.... and especially if the research is not independently studied & conducted. this reminds me of High-Corn Fructose Syrup commercials that I've been seeing lately

 

[jillio]

Although a cochlear implant enhances a deaf
child’s speech perception, speech production, and
language skills [25—27], data that relates these
language improvements on communication fluency
is lacking [28]. Since most studies measuring speech
perception and speech production used standard
speech-language test batteries and tests were conducted
in clinical environments, high scores in
these tests do not necessarily reflect conversational
competency in natural setting. Other than the
aforementioned speech-language abilities, communication
competency may be affected by other
factors such as the child’s intelligence, working
memory, and social adjustment [28]. The findings
of the present study in which children with cochlear
implants scored fairly poorly in speech perception
and speech comprehension tests and were rated
very poorly in communication area suggest that
these children had not acquired adequate language
skills required for conversational fluency. Tye-Murray
[28] in a study comparing the conversational
fluency in cochlear implant and normal hearing
children found that cochlear implant children have
a higher rate of communication breakdown compared
to the normal hearing children and tend to be
rated less favorably by the judges.

Mukari, S.Z., et al. (2007). Educational performance of pediatric cochlear implant recipients in mainstream classes. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology. 71, 231-240.

 

[shel90]

This is true. I may be a little off-topic here, but as an adult CI user, I'm able to understand words relatively well in quiet. However, when you add in background noise, my comphrension goes down several percentages. I would think the same concept would apply to children with CIs.

I am not against giving children that opportunity...just concerned that in the classroom where learning takes place, it gets compromised..same thing with language development because indencial (sorry for my bad spelling today) learning doesnt always happen in controlled environments which is why I believe to safe guard against those risk, ASL comes in.

 

[faire_jour]

What cast a doubt for me in this is you saying "I think....." so no it does not matter at all if the research is conducted by CI and/or audi in CI's pocket.... and especially if the research is not independently studied & conducted. this reminds me of High-Corn Fructose Syrup commercials that I've been seeing lately

I will Pm you with the research if you are really interested. It takes me time to get it. I usually just read and delete, so I'll have to look around for it.

 

[jillio]

I will Pm you with the research if you are really interested. It takes me time to get it. I usually just read and delete, so I'll have to look around for it.

You might want to use an academic site instead of just googling abstracts.

 

[Jiro]

I will Pm you with the research if you are really interested. It takes me time to get it. I usually just read and delete, so I'll have to look around for it.

no need to but feel free to share it here. research paper is a nyquil for me

 

[faire_jour]

Although a cochlear implant enhances a deaf
child’s speech perception, speech production, and
language skills [25—27], data that relates these
language improvements on communication fluency
is lacking [28]. Since most studies measuring speech
perception and speech production used standard
speech-language test batteries and tests were conducted
in clinical environments, high scores in
these tests do not necessarily reflect conversational
competency in natural setting. Other than the
aforementioned speech-language abilities, communication
competency may be affected by other
factors such as the child’s intelligence, working
memory, and social adjustment [28]. The findings
of the present study in which children with cochlear
implants scored fairly poorly in speech perception
and speech comprehension tests and were rated
very poorly in communication area suggest that
these children had not acquired adequate language
skills required for conversational fluency. Tye-Murray
[28] in a study comparing the conversational
fluency in cochlear implant and normal hearing
children found that cochlear implant children have
a higher rate of communication breakdown compared
to the normal hearing children and tend to be
rated less favorably by the judges.

Mukari, S.Z., et al. (2007). Educational performance of pediatric cochlear implant recipients in mainstream classes. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology. 71, 231-240.

That is all I claimed.