3 year old with cochears

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wirelessly posted

Beowulf said:
Wirelessly posted



i didn't say it was the only way to process things or find meaning. I didn't say that life couldn't be experienced in another way. I simply said that giving a child a CI gives them hearing that they didn't have before. That is what the mother said she was doing, giving her child the opportunity to experience something he didn't have before.

Yeah, but each child's experience is different. Who is to say that one experience is better than another, even the majority? The act of cutting a child open to fix it speaks volumes about that perspective. What is wrong with being deaf?

again, not fix, but create additional experiences and opportunities.
 
This may be the dumbest question ever and may belong in a thread with a similar name..BUT....

What if a small child refuses a hearing aid, say from infancy up, and perpetually tosses the aid, hides it, damages it, etc... even cries pitifully when made to wear a well fitted, perfectly programmed aid and the parent continues to put the aid on the child "for their benefit" but the child keeps saying NO!
So, the parent decides the exterior aid is worthless. The parent has the child fitted with a CI, and the same thing happens? Now the child has a well mapped, etc, interior hearing aid costing thousands and lots of maintenance. Would that parent be forced to defend his/her decision vehemently, even blaming or coercing the child?

Just asking, really.

That sounds like a truly awful situation -- are you experiencing this right now? Who do you feel you are defending yourself against? Blaming your child is a bit of a tough stance, LDNanna -- do you know why he or she does not want sound? How old is he/she -- can you communicate with him/her and find out what the child is experiencing?

I can think of 2 cases I know personally where parents came to a solution for rejection of an approach:
1. A child, now about 9-10, rejected his implant during the first few weeks after activation some years ago. His mom wasn't comfortable with it to begin with, had relented to the surgery under pressure from non-deaf family members. They simply stored his processor away, less than 3 months after the surgery. When he was ~8, he asked for it again, his mom finally agreed to let him try it on, hoping to alleviate some behavioral issues he was having by adding another communication approach, but without a new mapping, and with the long delay, she said it provided just a lot of meaningless noise, not pleasant, and he was very happy to put it back in storage. They think that perhaps at some later time, he'll try it again, but he seems satisfied with having given it another shot.

2. A deaf classmate of my daughter's refuses to use ASL, despite being from a Deaf family, with a wonderful network of Deaf family/friends and plenty of ASL input (and they are at an ASL-instruction-based school, too); the family thinks TV is a contributor to this, and has now opted to amplify him pretty intensively and place him in an acoustic access classroom so he can use spoken language and participate in classroom instruction, but still be exposed to ASL socially, among his peers at the school, so that if he changes his mind at some point, he won't have lost that critical early access to ASL. So they aren't shifting everything because of his rejection, but they are shifting his primary means of academic communication.
 
Wirelessly posted

faire_jour said:
Wirelessly posted

the CI does give a child the opportunity to experience something they could not experience before, the ability to hear. While it is true that a person can be successful and function perfectly fine without hearing, the implnat does, in fact, provide something they didn't have before.

It becomes fixing instead of giving opportunity if a parent get too forceful about it.
 
A deaf child "hears" with their eyes and their kinesthetic sense. Hearing is nothing more than processing information to meaning. The same thing can be processed to the same meaning in another way. Not hearing doesn't equate to not being able to create meaning. And meaning is the goal of processing all stimuli. Hearing is only one way to accomplish the task, and in general, is not even the most efficient way...even for those who have hearing. One can have no hearing and still have meaning. It is only important to those that have become so reliant on it.


:gpost:
 
Wow, that was a long video, but I watched it all. I was appalled at that HUGE scar. Holy cow. Was it really that big back then ?? (looks as if he said about 15 years ago.)

Well .. after seeing that .. makes me re-think some things. But I'm going to keep that to myself for the moment.
 
Wow, that was a long video, but I watched it all. I was appalled at that HUGE scar. Holy cow. Was it really that big back then ?? (looks as if he said about 15 years ago.)

Well .. after seeing that .. makes me re-think some things. But I'm going to keep that to myself for the moment.

yes, it was a huge scar back then. He is now happier than he was when he was forced to get CI by his parents.

No offense to those CI people...I do respect them if they choose to have CIs as adults.

Children with CIs...it makes me cringe.
 
Welcome. I do hope that you will stick around and understand that no one is militant against CIs. People, quite simply, are relating their personal experience of being deaf. Whether they would or would not choose a CI for themselves or their child is dependent upon what they have experienced living as a deaf person. They are the experts on the topic.

Frequently around here, when someone states the actuality and the drawbacks of a CI, they are labeled anti-CI. Nothing is further from the truth. I do hope you don't buy into that. It will interfere with the ability you have to learn from the deaf.

Try and see it this way: You say you have provided your child with the opportunity to experience things he would not be able to experience. That is understandable, because you experience your world through your auditory sense. However, that is only true for those that have experience with experiencing the world that way. A deaf child is not "missing the opportunity" to experience everything this world has to offer without a CI or an HA or any artificial devise to compensate for their lack of auditory sense. They experience life as fully as a hearing child does...they simply experience the same thing in a different way. Hearing is important to your perceptions because you are hearing. If you loose it, you will miss it, and will have to find alternate ways to experience your world. But a deaf child just naturally adapts, and experiences their world in a different way just because they have the need to do that. But their world is not missing anything. Nor are they missing opportunity. They simply experience things differently. The problems arise for deaf children when that natural adaptation is not respected, and we try to force them into a facsimile of a hearing child.

When one states that a child does not have the opportunity to experience fully the world around them, it also says that hearing is superior to not hearing. That is what people object to. There are many other statements that communicate the same message. And it is offensive to be told that you are not as complete a person as one with hearing is. I'm sure you can understand that.

So rather than saying "giving an opportunity to experience something he cannot" perhaps you could say, "providing an opportunity to experience something in the only way I know to experience it." Because the actual truth of the matter is, a deaf child, or a deaf adult, can have any experience that anyone else can have. They just experience it through a different sensory channel.

Jillio...you just nailed it.

Now, can we stop calling deaf people anti-CI when they really arent?
 
Yeah, but each child's experience is different. Who is to say that one experience is better than another, even the majority? The act of cutting a child open to fix it speaks volumes about that perspective. What is wrong with being deaf?

Nothing wrong with being deaf. In fact, I finally am enjoying it! :D
 
Welcome. I do hope that you will stick around and understand that no one is militant against CIs. People, quite simply, are relating their personal experience of being deaf. Whether they would or would not choose a CI for themselves or their child is dependent upon what they have experienced living as a deaf person. They are the experts on the topic.

Frequently around here, when someone states the actuality and the drawbacks of a CI, they are labeled anti-CI. Nothing is further from the truth. I do hope you don't buy into that. It will interfere with the ability you have to learn from the deaf.

Try and see it this way: You say you have provided your child with the opportunity to experience things he would not be able to experience. That is understandable, because you experience your world through your auditory sense. However, that is only true for those that have experience with experiencing the world that way. A deaf child is not "missing the opportunity" to experience everything this world has to offer without a CI or an HA or any artificial devise to compensate for their lack of auditory sense. They experience life as fully as a hearing child does...they simply experience the same thing in a different way. Hearing is important to your perceptions because you are hearing. If you loose it, you will miss it, and will have to find alternate ways to experience your world. But a deaf child just naturally adapts, and experiences their world in a different way just because they have the need to do that. But their world is not missing anything. Nor are they missing opportunity. They simply experience things differently. The problems arise for deaf children when that natural adaptation is not respected, and we try to force them into a facsimile of a hearing child.

When one states that a child does not have the opportunity to experience fully the world around them, it also says that hearing is superior to not hearing. That is what people object to. There are many other statements that communicate the same message. And it is offensive to be told that you are not as complete a person as one with hearing is. I'm sure you can understand that.

So rather than saying "giving an opportunity to experience something he cannot" perhaps you could say, "providing an opportunity to experience something in the only way I know to experience it." Because the actual truth of the matter is, a deaf child, or a deaf adult, can have any experience that anyone else can have. They just experience it through a different sensory channel.


:gpost:
 
... A deaf child is not "missing the opportunity" to experience everything this world has to offer without a CI or an HA or any artificial devise to compensate for their lack of auditory sense. They experience life as fully as a hearing child does...they simply experience the same thing in a different way. Hearing is important to your perceptions because you are hearing. If you loose it, you will miss it, and will have to find alternate ways to experience your world. But a deaf child just naturally adapts, and experiences their world in a different way just because they have the need to do that. But their world is not missing anything. Nor are they missing opportunity. They simply experience things differently. The problems arise for deaf children when that natural adaptation is not respected, and we try to force them into a facsimile of a hearing child....

This was my favorite part. Thanks, Jillio :)
 
Jillio...you just nailed it.

Now, can we stop calling deaf people anti-CI when they really arent?

And the person above you that said "Children with CIs make (him) cringe"? That anti-CI enough for you?
 
Every single person has said NOT to be forceful.
*shrugs* the term used was 'condone'...

And my signature is pretty obvious.. in the extreme case of "perfection" and the child still resists by SCREAMING and crying - this certain poster will still continue the usage. ie: force.

That is enough for me.
 
And the person above you that said "Children with CIs make (him) cringe"? That anti-CI enough for you?

Him? who? No it does not make anyone to be anti ci, just major surgery. It is the same thing for anyone who have major surgeries that does make anyone cringe.
 
Him? who? No it does not make anyone to be anti ci, just major surgery. It is the same thing for anyone who have major surgeries that does make anyone cringe.

No offense to those CI people...I do respect them if they choose to have CIs as adults.

Children with CIs...it makes me cringe.

Let's say someone were to say "I do respect if someone chooses to use ASL as an adult. But children using ASL ... it makes me cringe." You wouldn't see that as anti-ASL?
 
Let's say someone were to say "I do respect if someone chooses to use ASL as an adult. But children using ASL ... it makes me cringe." You wouldn't see that as anti-ASL?

There's an actual physical/health risk difference between major surgery and asl.
 
There's an actual physical/health risk difference between major surgery and asl.

OK, "living in Los Angeles makes me cringe" "driving a car to work makes me cringe" -- these don't sound negative to you either?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top