Peer Relationships of Children With Cochlear Implants

Status
Not open for further replies.
It was one article and I don't believe it's the same one. If you can provide me access why not just post it here so we may all benefit from it

Because, dear, it takes too much space to post a 20 page article. If you are interested, a solution has been offered.
 
Because, dear, it takes too much space to post a 20 page article. If you are interested, a solution has been offered.
It's ok... its not the same article anyway. Besides, the space the text takes up is minimal compared to the benifit it may offer to many that visit this site/thread
 
It's ok... its not the same article anyway. Besides, the space the text takes up is minimal compared to the benifit it may offer to many that visit this site/thread

And I have a copy of this one as well, and in fact, have already emailed it to more than one member of this board that expressed an interest.

Alex may have something more to say about posting a 20 page article. Again, the information has been made available to you. If you choose not to access it, it is your choice.
 
Conclusions: The pattern of results suggests that cochlear implants may be effective in improving deaf children's communication and social skills.

"may be" doesnt guarantee it which is why I believe all deaf children need to meet and interact with other deaf children.
 
And I have a copy of this one as well, and in fact, have already emailed it to more than one member of this board that expressed an interest.

Alex may have something more to say about posting a 20 page article. Again, the information has been made available to you. If you choose not to access it, it is your choice.
Thats fine. Perhaps posting just the bits that are relivent to the conversation and siting the study could be effective. No offense but I'm just not comfortable giving out my email information to people that I don't know.
 
"may be" doesnt guarantee it which is why I believe all deaf children need to meet and interact with other deaf children.
There are no guarantees no matter which way you go. I don't recall any mention of not interacting with other deaf children.
 
Thats fine. Perhaps posting just the bits that are relivent to the conversation and siting the study could be effective. No offense but I'm just not comfortable giving out my email information to people that I don't know.

That is taking things out of context, and I prefer not to do that when it comes to research. Best to provide it all for a critical analysis.

That's fine. Your choice.
 
Here's a good analogy...Remember when the Cox-2 inhibitors (Celebrex, Vioxx trademark names) hit the market? They were THE ANSWER for people with arthritic pain, right? Turns out, not so much. After being on the market a while we learn that there are also risks, potentially serious. Some people may take them forever and never experience these side effects...others, not so much.

The same with kids with CIs. Some may be mainstreamed and do quite well. Develop friendships, interact and excel academically. Hurray for them!! Others, not so much.

As data comes in, I think it will show that the ones doing so well are not the typical, mainstreamed students, but the overachievers. (Please do not attack me here, I also have one of those...sophomore, plans on attending Duke, becoming Interventional Radiologist)

When CIs first became popular, hearing people (and I am hearing) typically thought that by implanting a child you could make them a "hearing" child...Guess what?! You can, however, they are still deaf. They will always be different. (And, that's OK) But please do not tell me that because they are implanted they will now be the same/ form the same type of peer realtionships as their hearing classmates...I am witnessing this with my own eyes.
 
Here's a good analogy...Remember when the Cox-2 inhibitors (Celebrex, Vioxx trademark names) hit the market? They were THE ANSWER for people with arthritic pain, right? Turns out, not so much. After being on the market a while we learn that there are also risks, potentially serious. Some people may take them forever and never experience these side effects...others, not so much.

The same with kids with CIs. Some may be mainstreamed and do quite well. Develop friendships, interact and excel academically. Hurray for them!! Others, not so much.

As data comes in, I think it will show that the ones doing so well are not the typical, mainstreamed students, but the overachievers. (Please do not attack me here, I also have one of those...sophomore, plans on attending Duke, becoming Interventional Radiologist)

When CIs first became popular, hearing people (and I am hearing) typically thought that by implanting a child you could make them a "hearing" child...Guess what?! You can, however, they are still deaf. They will always be different. (And, that's OK) But please do not tell me that because they are implanted they will now be the same/ form the same type of peer realtionships as their hearing classmates...I am witnessing this with my own eyes.

:gpost:

BTW....another article on its way.
 
There are no guarantees no matter which way you go. I don't recall any mention of not interacting with other deaf children.

Not directed at you..just using that statement as one of the many reasons why I believe the way I do.
 
Here's a good analogy...Remember when the Cox-2 inhibitors (Celebrex, Vioxx trademark names) hit the market? They were THE ANSWER for people with arthritic pain, right? Turns out, not so much. After being on the market a while we learn that there are also risks, potentially serious. Some people may take them forever and never experience these side effects...others, not so much.

The same with kids with CIs. Some may be mainstreamed and do quite well. Develop friendships, interact and excel academically. Hurray for them!! Others, not so much.

As data comes in, I think it will show that the ones doing so well are not the typical, mainstreamed students, but the overachievers. (Please do not attack me here, I also have one of those...sophomore, plans on attending Duke, becoming Interventional Radiologist)

When CIs first became popular, hearing people (and I am hearing) typically thought that by implanting a child you could make them a "hearing" child...Guess what?! You can, however, they are still deaf. They will always be different. (And, that's OK) But please do not tell me that because they are implanted they will now be the same/ form the same type of peer realtionships as their hearing classmates...I am witnessing this with my own eyes.

U arent the only one who witnessing it.
 
Here's a good analogy...Remember when the Cox-2 inhibitors (Celebrex, Vioxx trademark names) hit the market? They were THE ANSWER for people with arthritic pain, right? Turns out, not so much. After being on the market a while we learn that there are also risks, potentially serious. Some people may take them forever and never experience these side effects...others, not so much.

The same with kids with CIs. Some may be mainstreamed and do quite well. Develop friendships, interact and excel academically. Hurray for them!! Others, not so much.

As data comes in, I think it will show that the ones doing so well are not the typical, mainstreamed students, but the overachievers. (Please do not attack me here, I also have one of those...sophomore, plans on attending Duke, becoming Interventional Radiologist)

When CIs first became popular, hearing people (and I am hearing) typically thought that by implanting a child you could make them a "hearing" child...Guess what?! You can, however, they are still deaf. They will always be different. (And, that's OK) But please do not tell me that because they are implanted they will now be the same/ form the same type of peer realtionships as their hearing classmates...I am witnessing this with my own eyes.
That supports the "one size doesn't fit all" philosophy that has been echoed over and over. On the part I bolded in your comment, where did anyone say the peer relationships were the same?
 
That is taking things out of context, and I prefer not to do that when it comes to research. Best to provide it all for a critical analysis.

That's fine. Your choice.
That is where we will have to agree to disagree. I believe you can take bits from a study to make counterpoints. It's ok... you don't have to spend any time on this. Your choice.
 
That is where we will have to agree to disagree. I believe you can take bits from a study to make counterpoints. It's ok... you don't have to spend any time on this. Your choice.

That is the whole point, RD. Taking bits and pieces to make counterpoints does not provide one with the information necessary to evaluate the validity of those counterpoints. That is why I always request a link or a reference to a complete study, and why I insist on providing a complete study.
 
That is the whole point, RD. Taking bits and pieces to make counterpoints does not provide one with the information necessary to evaluate the validity of those counterpoints. That is why I always request a link or a reference to a complete study, and why I insist on providing a complete study.
I don't agree with that. It's ok. Agree to disagree and let it go.
 
I don't agree with that. It's ok. Agree to disagree and let it go.

Then we will agree to disagree, but direct experience in research, statistics, and methodology has led me to sceptism regarding that which is taken out of context from a research report.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top