A cochlear implant story

Cloggy said:
Not in Norway!
I know what you mean, but that does not mean everyone should be able to "speak" signlanguage. I don't expect Norwegians to learn Dutch. I will do my best to speak Norwegian. And it is difficult for me, and tiresome. I have to ask them to repeat what they say, or I guess, or I don't get it and ignore it. And when I'm tired I will not be able to follow a conversation. (Which I can in English.)
So, it takes an effort. Not as much as lipreading in combination with bad hearing, but still, I will have to make the effort.
I am the minority in this country.
Click to expand...

No that is not what I mean. What I mean is that with the risk of exposing the deaf child to spoken (any) language only, the child doesnt have the auditory skills like a hearing child to pick up spoken language naturally. Deaf children have to be taught or fed spoken language. U, as a hearing person, have the auditory capabilities to gain full access to any spoken language naturally so u are not put at risk for language deprivation while deaf children are if they are not exposed to sign language. Doesnt matter what language...

I hope that makes sense of what I was talking about.
 
Cheri said:
And how would the doctor really knows it could work, Can he predict the future? No, he cannot.

It's wrong to even tell people that to give them high hopes.
Click to expand...
Of course s/he can. That's what experts are for. To give a realistic outcome of the procedure.

And s/he did not give her high hope. She did it herself by studying, investigating etc.

Why would you assume CI doesn't work.... and define "CI works"
Apart from the mechanical part of the CI - stimulating the nerve, "Works" involves other things like settings of the software etc. But also the patiens.

In your case (and many others...), it would be totally fair if the doctor says:
"Cheri... Ci will probably not work for you".
This would not mean you would not hear sound; it would mean that with your attitude you will not be able to make it work.
Would you then still go along and get the CI, you would not like it, stop using it, and Ci would be considered to be a "failure".

Now, the doctor said to you "it will probably not work for you".... so he was right...
 
highlands said:
It may be cuz hearing people are majority and may overlook the other's needs.
Click to expand...
The first statement is definately true. The second one - probably for the majority of people.

Then again,
how realistic is it for 99% of the population to adjust to some level to the 1%, versus making it possible for the 1% to adjust to some level to the 99%...
In the case of deafness, solutions have been found for deaf people who want it to be able to communicate better with hearing people.
To me, that does not sound like "overlooking others needs"..... it just happens NOT to be your need !!!
 
Cloggy said:
Of course s/he can. That's what experts are for. To give a realistic outcome of the procedure.
Click to expand...

The experts don't always get it right, I'm sure they're made plenty of mistakes just like doctors, nurses, police officers, scientists. they can't determining for certain that it could work for this person.

cochlear implant does not guarantee the ability for everyone to hear. It all depends on how it'll pick up the responds of sounds.

I've know some people who are implanted didn't get expectations lot out of cochlear implant but they got what they want to hear, like for example music.
 
Audiofuzzy said:
By "this woman" you mean Melissa Greenlee's?

She was late deafened.

She was deafened at age 8. That is considered to be post lingual. Late deafened refers to adventitious deafness. There is a difference.



But anyway, what was your point?

My point is that you brought up early implantation regarding this article.



YOU get a grip on yourself, and kindly answer my question, please?:
WHERE did I said the CI is going to improve the situations of discrimination?

In every post you have made regarding the CI allowing for integration into the hearing world.
Fuzzy
Click to expand...

Now, would you kindly answer all of the questions I have posed to you that you have convieniently avoided?
 
Cloggy said:
Why such a denigrating remark about the doctor... Was that really needed or is this the "All doctors are pushy and know k\nothing" attitude....

The comment in the article by the doctor was "This could work for you,"
How does that NOT show reality..???
Click to expand...

Stay focused cloggy. The comment regarding the fact that the CI could put an end to her deafness is what I was referencing. That is extremely unrealistic. No it's not. It is totally and unequivocally false.
 
*sigh* why have we repeat that CI itself not develop the children with speech and language skill but hear.

HA and CI develop the children to hear...
 
Cloggy said:
Of course s/he can. That's what experts are for. To give a realistic outcome of the procedure.

And s/he did not give her high hope. She did it herself by studying, investigating etc.

Why would you assume CI doesn't work.... and define "CI works"
Apart from the mechanical part of the CI - stimulating the nerve, "Works" involves other things like settings of the software etc. But also the patiens.

In your case (and many others...), it would be totally fair if the doctor says:
"Cheri... Ci will probably not work for you".
This would not mean you would not hear sound; it would mean that with your attitude you will not be able to make it work.
Would you then still go along and get the CI, you would not like it, stop using it, and Ci would be considered to be a "failure".

Now, the doctor said to you "it will probably not work for you".... so he was right...
Click to expand...


No, it would bwe ethical and correct for the doctor not to convey the message that the CI is going to eradicate the deafness in any individual. Once again,what has begun as support for this young lady has been twisted by you into assumptions that the community is non-supportive. The fact of the matter here is, every person you have accused of being anti-CI has posted something positive regarding this girl's experience, and you have jumped in to twist it around to non-siupport from the deaf community regarding CI. The only unsupportive action being taken here is your refusal to support the deaf in their attempts to bridge the gaps. Why is it that you seek to sonstantly widen the gap, cloggy? Is it that the further you distance yourself from the opinions of the dea community, the more you can remain separate and thus maintain your belief that to hear is better than to not hear?
 
Tousi said:
This is a good point BUT one's OWN family? No excuse....
Click to expand...

I didn't think of family , only in general.

FYI,as a deaf ,I couldn't have much support from my own family.

I work at a public hospital and believe me there is only a few people who care about my deafness .. and the majority don't give a fawk about my deafness.. sad :roll:
 
Cloggy said:
The first statement is definately true. The second one - probably for the majority of people.

Then again,
how realistic is it for 99% of the population to adjust to some level to the 1%, versus making it possible for the 1% to adjust to some level to the 99%...
In the case of deafness, solutions have been found for deaf people who want it to be able to communicate better with hearing people.
To me, that does not sound like "overlooking others needs"..... it just happens NOT to be your need !!!
Click to expand...

Your percentages are off, therefore invalidating your argument.
 
Audiofuzzy said:
Come to think of it, you are right Cloggy.
to say " this COULD work" is not the same as "it WILL work".
and it did worked for her. That's reality.

Fuzzy
Click to expand...

That remains to be seen. To date, according to the article, she was still unable to understand speech. Hearinga potatoe chip bag crinkle is an improvement, perhaps, but really does nothing to aid communication. And since you insist that the implant is done to improve speech, the success rate of this particular case remains undetermined. Andthat is according ot the criteria that you set out.
 
Liebling:-))) said:
*sigh* why have we repeat that CI itself not develop the children with speech and language skill but hear.

HA and CI develop the children to hear...
Click to expand...


Some thinks CI is the only device that will improve their speech and language skills not hearing aids...
 
highlands said:
I didn't think of family , only in general.

FYI,as a deaf ,I couldn't have much support from my own family.

I work at a public hospital and believe me there is only a few people who care about my deafness .. and the majority don't give a fawk about my deafness.. sad :roll:
Click to expand...

So, from a moral perspective, what needs to change? Your deafness, or the inconsiderate attitudes toward deafness that your co-workers have? Which would provide the greater benefit, not just to you, but to society as a whole?
 
highlands said:
I didn't think of family , only in general.

FYI,as a deaf ,I couldn't have much support from my own family.

I work at a public hospital and believe me there is only a few people who care about my deafness .. and the majority don't give a fawk about my deafness.. sad :roll:
Click to expand...

Exactly, Highlands and I feel for you. It is a known fact, for you, regarding your family, no question there but for the hearing people you speak of, try to look at them closer because people fear the unknown and if you are able to be friendly and educate the on the BASICS of your deafness, I am sure that you will win some over to you. Best wishes!
 
Cloggy said:
From a language development point of view, it is.
Click to expand...

No. cloggy, it isn't. Or did your language development stop at age 8? From a language development point of view, she is post-lingual, which means that she had acquired the foundations of spoken language prior to onset. Language contiunes to develop over the lifespan....or at least one hopes that it would. For some, that appears not to be the case. However, late deafened refers to adventitiously deafened.
 
jillio said:
So, from a moral perspective, what needs to change? Your deafness, or the inconsiderate attitudes toward deafness that your co-workers have? Which would provide the greater benefit, not just to you, but to society as a whole?
Click to expand...


To be simple, They do not consider me to be deaf. They mostly want me to live in hearing world and ignore my deaf side.. and I could never able to share my feelings with my family..I needed psychological support, I needed crying on my mom's knees .. but I couldn't .. My world was rejected..
 
Back
Top