Success for deaf community

[Mrs Bucket]

It is human nature to want to "fix" what is perceived as broken.

Naturally a profession will want to push something onto a perceived "broken" culture/community when it can be seen as fixable when in reality, it's just fine and functions totally on its own as a culture and a community.

This is why heads will always butt, true colours comes out and mudslinging becomes a national holiday 24/7.

 

[jillio]

Not forced but definitely pressured. Big time.

Exactly. No one is holding anyone down and implanting them while they scream and fight to get away.....but by the same token, when it is strongly suggested with the implication that it will lead to keeping one's job, that is certainly undue persuassion. When someone is told that it will lead to full integration in a hearing world, and the ability to function completely orally with none of the obstacles non-implanted deaf face, it is undue coersion. When parents are told they must do it NOW or the opportunity will be forever lost for their child to be just like a hearing child in language and development, it is nothing short of perverse salesmanship.

 

[jillio]

It is human nature to want to "fix" what is perceived as broken.

Naturally a profession will want to push something onto a perceived "broken" culture/community when it can be seen as fixable when in reality, it's just fine and functions totally on its own as a culture and a community.

This is why heads will always butt, true colours comes out and mudslinging becomes a national holiday 24/7.

Hmmmm.... how about we all get together and fix the broken attitude of the medical professionals that see deafness as a disease?

 

[Buffalo]

It is human nature to want to "fix" what is perceived as broken.

Naturally a profession will want to push something onto a perceived "broken" culture/community when it can be seen as fixable when in reality, it's just fine and functions totally on its own as a culture and a community.

This is why heads will always butt, true colours comes out and mudslinging becomes a national holiday 24/7.

You are good as Bott. Sometimes I get confused with you two!

 

[Mrs Bucket]

Hmmmm.... how about we all get together and fix the broken attitude of the medical professionals that see deafness as a disease?

This is where we need to band together and educate about deaf culture because the medical field is only exposed to deafness itself, per se.

In medical school, some doctors are only taught about deaf culture for a few minutes. Some say 5 minutes, some say a few minutes. I cannot cite sources because they are folklore. I tried to google but cannot back my statement which is why I stated as folklore.

Doctors do view our deafness as a disability and a disease whereas we view it as a culture and a way of life.

This is why we must change their approach with such zeal as much as they are with us with CIs.

 

[Mrs Bucket]

You are good as Bott. Sometimes I get confused with you two!

Oh thank you!! That's a HUGE compliment considering I admire Botts very much!!

 

[Daredevel7]

Wait wait..... let me back it up.

You guys actually want deaf people to PAY for their CI?

How is a state requiring insurance to pay for all CI surgeries a step towards required CI for all deaf people? Is it because if they make a hype out of it, that means more people are going to think "Oh wow, CI must work like a miracle if insurance is required to pay for it."? Do you realize that either way, deaf people get screwed somehow?

Situation 1: Deaf people must pay for CI. We all know most of us would never be able to afford it. This means most people who want it... too bad for them.
Situation 2: Insurance is required to pay for CI. Hype causes more people to think CI's must work, therefore there's more discrimination in the workplace, etc.

Which is worse:
Denying deaf people a chance to hear more or adding more discrimination towards deaf people?

 

[dreama]

Wait wait..... let me back it up.

You guys actually want deaf people to PAY for their CI?

How is a state requiring insurance to pay for all CI surgeries a step towards required CI for all deaf people? Is it because if they make a hype out of it, that means more people are going to think "Oh wow, CI must work like a miracle if insurance is required to pay for it."? Do you realize that either way, deaf people get screwed somehow?

Situation 1: Deaf people must pay for CI. We all know most of us would never be able to afford it. This means most people who want it... too bad for them.
Situation 2: Insurance is required to pay for CI. Hype causes more people to think CI's must work, therefore there's more discrimination in the workplace, etc.

Which is worse:
Denying deaf people a chance to hear more or adding more discrimination towards deaf people?

We have enough discrimination so we really don't want more. Some people can't have CI but alternatives are being denied because of people think CI's cure. I think that instead of handing out CI's to everyone wether they want them or not we should look into a system that provides assistance in funding ALL items such as hearing aids, Tactile aids, CI, computers(for deafblind), and other assistive devices that help the deaf and deafblind. Nobody who gets a minicom will be considered hearing but it seems some people think differantly about CI.

 

[Daredevel7]

We have enough discrimination so we really don't want more. Some people can't have CI but alternatives are being denied because of people think CI's cure. I think that instead of handing out CI's to everyone wether they want them or not we should look into a system that provides assistance in funding ALL items such as hearing aids, Tactile aids, CI, computers(for deafblind), and other assistive devices that help the deaf and deafblind. Nobody who gets a minicom will be considered hearing but it seems some people think differantly about CI.

To be quite honest, I don't think it will add more discrimination anyway. There's so much of it already. 99% of the time people either expect too much from you or expect less from you.

Oh also, you're right about funding all assistive devices (at least within reason.).

 

[rockdrummer]

Not forced but definitely pressured. Big time.

There is a huge difference between being pressured and being forced.

 

[rockdrummer]

You can't throw around words like forced and pressured and expect them to mean the same thing. They don't. They are very different definitions. And again, that is not what this thread is about. It's about a success for the deaf community where a law in Wisconsin may be passed that will require insurance companies to cover the costs for a CI where they were not covered before.

 

[rockdrummer]

Wait wait..... let me back it up.

You guys actually want deaf people to PAY for their CI?

How is a state requiring insurance to pay for all CI surgeries a step towards required CI for all deaf people? Is it because if they make a hype out of it, that means more people are going to think "Oh wow, CI must work like a miracle if insurance is required to pay for it."? Do you realize that either way, deaf people get screwed somehow?

Situation 1: Deaf people must pay for CI. We all know most of us would never be able to afford it. This means most people who want it... too bad for them.
Situation 2: Insurance is required to pay for CI. Hype causes more people to think CI's must work, therefore there's more discrimination in the workplace, etc.

Which is worse:
Denying deaf people a chance to hear more or adding more discrimination towards deaf people?

Why does it have to be one or the other? Why can't it be that deaf people that choose to go the CI route now will have financial assistance by the insurance companies? I believe there is enough history and facts about the CI available for folks to make an informed decision. Anybody that gets caught up in the hype and doesn't do their research will no doubt be setting themselves up for a possible letdown.

 

[Daredevel7]

Why does it have to be one or the other? Why can't it be that deaf people that choose to go the CI route now will have financial assistance by the insurance companies? I believe there is enough history and facts about the CI available for folks to make an informed decision. Anybody that gets caught up in the hype and doesn't do their research will no doubt be setting themselves up for a possible letdown.

Honestly, it doesn't. But it seems to me that some people like to go to the extremes....After all, apparently people believe that we soon will be forced to undergo "CI installation".

I love that term by the way... "CI installation".

 

[Mrs Bucket]

Honestly, it doesn't. But it seems to me that some people like to go to the extremes....After all, apparently people believe that we soon will be forced to undergo "CI installation".

I love that term by the way... "CI installation".

Unfortunately some people do not share your positive approach to CIs. As you mention some people like to go to the extremes and you cannot blame them. They reject change because they did not have positive change growing up so naturally some view "CI installation" as "cultural genocide."

This is where, you rockdrummer, need to understand the history of eugenics and show some compassion and be careful with the line of questioning here if you may.

As a hearing person, I admire you for your curiosity and your zest for learning however that zest can come across as offensive to some Deaf people. For others as jillio, she is "D"eaf because she is given that by us, the community.

Yes, you may say it's clique-y, but to us, it's a representation of who we are and our culture.

CIs, for some Deaf people, is another form of Eugenics. Some don't want CIs, some readily embrace it.

I applaud those who want CIs as I am an advocate of disability rights and I encourage those who want CIs to go for it, those who are ASL purists to educate CI users about ASL within reason and I encourage all to keep an open mind and an open heart.

 

[shel90]

Unfortunately some people do not share your positive approach to CIs. As you mention some people like to go to the extremes and you cannot blame them. They reject change because they did not have positive change growing up so naturally some view "CI installation" as "cultural genocide."

This is where, you rockdrummer, need to understand the history of eugenics and show some compassion and be careful with the line of questioning here if you may.

As a hearing person, I admire you for your curiosity and your zest for learning however that zest can come across as offensive to some Deaf people. For others as jillio, she is "D"eaf because she is given that by us, the community.

Yes, you may say it's clique-y, but to us, it's a representation of who we are and our culture.

CIs, for some Deaf people, is another form of Eugenics. Some don't want CIs, some readily embrace it.

I applaud those who want CIs as I am an advocate of disability rights and I encourage those who want CIs to go for it, those who are ASL purists to educate CI users about ASL within reason and I encourage all to keep an open mind and an open heart.

Whao! That's a damn good post, Mrs. Bucket!!!

 

[Daredevel7]

Unfortunately some people do not share your positive approach to CIs. As you mention some people like to go to the extremes and you cannot blame them. They reject change because they did not have positive change growing up so naturally some view "CI installation" as "cultural genocide."

This is where, you rockdrummer, need to understand the history of eugenics and show some compassion and be careful with the line of questioning here if you may.

As a hearing person, I admire you for your curiosity and your zest for learning however that zest can come across as offensive to some Deaf people. For others as jillio, she is "D"eaf because she is given that by us, the community.

Yes, you may say it's clique-y, but to us, it's a representation of who we are and our culture.

CIs, for some Deaf people, is another form of Eugenics. Some don't want CIs, some readily embrace it.

I applaud those who want CIs as I am an advocate of disability rights and I encourage those who want CIs to go for it, those who are ASL purists to educate CI users about ASL within reason and I encourage all to keep an open mind and an open heart.

I am not sure if this post is for me or rockdrummer or both of us, but I do try to see it from both sides. However I tend to look at things logically, which can mean sometimes I sound cold-hearted. I understand why people are upset, but does this mean they ACTUALLY don't want this to happen at all? (No insurance for CI?) That's what I am asking.

I read this thread from start to finish in one sitting and I was disturbed by the weird twist of topic.

 

[Mrs Bucket]

I am not sure if this post is for me or rockdrummer or both of us, but I do try to see it from both sides. However I tend to look at things logically, which can mean sometimes I sound cold-hearted. I understand why people are upset, but does this mean they ACTUALLY don't want this to happen at all? (No insurance for CI?) That's what I am asking.

I read this thread from start to finish in one sitting and I was disturbed by the weird twist of topic.

It was actually to both you and rockdrummer, I forgot to quote him as well. My apologies for the confusion.

I appreciate the fact you are honest & prefer the fact you approach things logically as it should be. I don't see you as cold-hearted because I see you as a sensible person.

Naturally people are upset if a law is passed and I'm not going to mince words here, this is future Deaf children's lives being determined by the lawmakers who have very little or no vested interest in Deaf Culture & the Deaf Community.

Why are you disturbed by the weird twist of this topic when we, the Deaf ADers, go through this on a daily basis?

 

[Rio]

That's soo disturbing to read. I am very proud today, my student was approached today, with great news, made student of the year! In adult education. Deaf can do it!!

 

[Babyface]

Success for deaf community -- chicagotribune.com

This is in response to "Wisconsin could be first to require cochlear implants" (News, April 23). Sometimes the worst things in history have been done with the best intentions.

Lawmakers tend to simplify an issue and say if more children have access to cochlear implants then they would be able to close down the Wisconsin School for the Deaf. The reality is, they are ignoring some critical aspects.

Babies, whether they are hearing or deaf, can acquire language skills through American Sign Language before they can speak. The benefits of early language development from sign language is more consistently successful than relying on an invasive surgery that could cause death or other serious side effects. Sure there are success stories, but what about those children who still cannot understand speech even after years of extensive speech training?

The formula for success of any deaf child must include positive deaf role models and a positive self-identity. This means that schools must have deaf teachers and administrators who can empathize and communicate effortlessly with them. It's understandable that parents would want their children to remain close to them and to hear and speak like them, but it is dangerous to cling to the false hope that cochlear implants or intensive speech therapy will make their children "whole" again. That puts the child at a tremendous disadvantage and puts him or her through unnecessary risk.

As a Democrat and deaf person myself, Rep. David Cullen (D-Milwaukee) does the deaf community a great disservice when he says, "This bill is going to allow children to keep their hearing, to become members of society, to go to school and keep a job."That is an insult to me and many in the deaf community because it tells society that unless deaf people can hear and speak, they are unequal, uneducated and unemployed. That is fallacious and his comments only encourage discrimination on the basis of a person's ability to hear and speak.

I am living proof of a successful deaf person without cochlear implants; I have a degree from Georgetown University, work at an investment bank and am certainly an equal member of society.

-Timothy Riker
Chicago

I agree with many of the above post, this is absolute bull, oh ok I guess those that are deaf and have no hearing are useless members of society and must be casted away *I say f u to anyone that thinks that Deaf Power Mofo
*which by the way im getting tatted on my back

 

[ASLGAL]

ASLGAL - I completely respect your viewpoints and opinions.

Thanks, and if it were possible to provide specific information regarding specific businesses entities and people I would.

Which is worse:
Denying deaf people a chance to hear more or adding more discrimination towards deaf people?

I do not understand how the two concepts are being related and placed in an either/or proposition. Would you elaborate a little for me.

Eugenics is alive and well, it is just more covert these days.

I am very proud today, my student was approached today, with great news, made student of the year! In adult education. Deaf can do it!!

Awesome!! Sure doesn't sound like anything needs to be 'fixed' there

No one is holding anyone down and implanting them while they scream and fight to get away.....but by the same token, when it is strongly suggested with the implication that it will lead to keeping one's job, that is certainly undue persuassion. When someone is told that it will lead to full integration in a hearing world, and the ability to function completely orally with none of the obstacles non-implanted deaf face, it is undue coersion. When parents are told they must do it NOW or the opportunity will be forever lost for their child to be just like a hearing child in language and development, it is nothing short of perverse salesmanship.

YES!


and Rockdrummer, do not get me wrong - If an adult researches and makes an informed decision to get a CI themselves then I am cheering for them.
I, however am infuriated by those who force and will speak out for those forced to get CI's against their will (children) and those coerced (adults)