Aren't we wasting time with HAs...

[jag]

I don't think it's nice to say "HoH are trashing". This sounds very patronizing.

With my HAs I am HoH, and I don't view myself as "trashing".
I feel that being neither hearing nor deaf THIS is exactly where my place is, but I am certainly not "trashing".
There are basically two types of "hearing loss" - deaf and HoH, and that's just that. By saying things like the "deafies" show they are "better" than HoH. I disagree.

Fuzzy I said Thrashing. Meaning trying to keep their head above water but sinking alot of the time. I as a hoh person do know what thrashing around trying to hear but not always succeeding is like. I thought it was a good way to describe it myself..

The difference in the hoh and the deaf is the discription is the deaf have never heard thus do not miss the sounds they don't hear. The hoh person does miss those sounds thus many do not sink down to the bottom because they are aware of what they miss and so they continue to try to keep their head above water to enjoy the world they really like, but it's a stressful exsistance. Ci's help that exsistance tremendously.

That was my main idea behind this thread. I still think those who can hear well with HAs would also benefit more from CI at any time.
Of course, the decision is personal - I am speaking in general terms.

Fuzzy

Oh I agree, knowing how well I hear with a CI I would actually like for the option to be available for more of those like me who are borderline. I mean years of filling in the blanks when speaking to people even translates into correct interpetation of sentences when in a booth. There needs to be tests that realy more on real conditions when testing children and adults for CI's. No place is completely quite, theres even computerfans running in offices and unless a room is sound proof HA's do pick that stuff up and make the sound to loud for some people. I wish more could benefit from more realistic testing so they could make decisions that would hopefully help them 'float around on top without a care'.

 

[Audiofuzzy]

Liebling said "You should write "pros/cons between HA and CI" or "advantages/disadvantages between HA and CI" instead of "Aren't we wasting time with HAs"..." You didn't repond to Liebling.

That's because the thread is not supposed to be about pro/cons or differences between HAs and CI.

The thread is about: ~ the technology like CI is out there, more and more people are being happy with it - but why aren't even more interested in it, if they use HAs. Obviously, if somebody use HAs it is because one wants to hear, right?
I was interested what reasons would pple have to still preffer HAs over CI, despite so many encuoraging, happy posts of newly CI-ed. beside the obvious, of course - the surgery.

A simple, calm, rational answer from one's own POV was all that was ever needed.

Yes I know you didn´t intend to upset obese people but the problem is you care about yourself, not think the posters´ feeling.

oh grrrr. the "obese" example in the other thread was purely fictional example to just illustrate the point I was making, not representing reality in the least bit,
unfortunately some overexcited pple eager to put me down instead of focusing on the message - have missed it entirely, all to happy to talk about anything but the example's message.

And you, Liebling - haven't you noticed what even the moderators said a few times already - LET GO and MOVE ON?

Fuzzy

 

[Audiofuzzy]

Fuzzy I said Thrashing. Meaning trying to keep their head above water but sinking alot of the time. I as a hoh person do know what thrashing around trying to hear but not always succeeding is like. I thought it was a good way to describe it myself..

The difference in the hoh and the deaf is the discription is the deaf have never heard thus do not miss the sounds they don't hear. The hoh person does miss those sounds thus many do not sink down to the bottom because they are aware of what they miss and so they continue to try to keep their head above water to enjoy the world they really like, but it's a stressful exsistance. Ci's help that exsistance tremendously.




Oh I agree, knowing how well I hear with a CI I would actually like for the option to be available for more of those like me who are borderline. I mean years of filling in the blanks when speaking to people even translates into correct interpetation of sentences when in a booth. There needs to be tests that realy more on real conditions when testing children and adults for CI's. No place is completely quite, theres even computerfans running in offices and unless a room is sound proof HA's do pick that stuff up and make the sound to loud for some people. I wish more could benefit from more realistic testing so they could make decisions that would hopefully help them 'float around on top without a care'.

I've already explained I meant 'thrashing', just misspelled.
I know what that means, and I still feel it's patronizing. It's basically saying: look at you hopeless HoH - thrashing between us superiors - "pure deaf " and "pure hearing". (or should I say pure herring lol)


And yeah, that what I was considering while thinking of this thread - seeying how those who said CI was enabling them to hear better than ever before with the best of their HAs, I wondered gee maybe it would be worth to skip HAs altogether, jump straight into CI. Just a thought.

Fuzzy

 

[deafskeptic]

I've already explained I meant 'thrashing', just misspelled.
I know what that means, and I still feel it's patronizing. It's basically saying: look at you hopeless HoH - thrashing between us superiors - "pure deaf " and "pure hearing". (or should I say pure herring lol)

Fuzzy

I didn't think Jag was being patronzing. I'd say it's true for those with excellent oral skills but poor receptive abilities due to hearing loss; they'd be struggling to comunicate with others and it can be exhausting sometimes. In short, they're thrashing around.

Personally, I don't think hearing or those who are totally deaf are better than those who are HOH. I wouldn't have used this analogy myself but I do get the idea.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

oh grrrr. the "obese" example in the other thread was purely fictional example to just illustrate the point I was making, not representing reality in the least bit,
unfortunately some overexcited pple eager to put me down instead of focusing on the message - have missed it entirely, all to happy to talk about anything but the example's message.

And you, Liebling - haven't you noticed what even the moderators said a few times already - LET GO and MOVE ON?

Fuzzy

Huh?

See your own word...

Fuzzy´s post.
As for the "why" - Kaitin, just look what some pple write to me.
You say - "more positive way"... hmmmm.. I don't know how could I phrased my question in more positve way. Besides I think I've explained my intentions pretty well in my first post?:

Don´t twist my word... I tried to show you one example of your many negative posts when you thought you made positive posts, that´s all. Of course we know that you frequent made hypothetical posts which you thought it´s positive example which it´s not. We showed you that it´s not positive but you refused to see it that´s how it ends drama.

 

[deafskeptic]

Huh?

See your own word...

I was like uh? She's the one who needs to let it go. Don't think we're the only ones reacting this way either.
Don´t twist my word... I tried to show you one example of your many negative posts when you thought you made positive posts, that´s all. Of course we know that you frequent made hypothetical posts which you thought it´s positive example which it´s not. We showed you that it´s not positive but you refused to see it that´s how it ends drama.

Fuzzy, as we've pointed out many times over, you don't seem to realize how you phrase things to others can affect how they react to you. You also don't seem to have many social skills if your posts are any example. In short, you're short on pragmatics language wise. I had to look up this word because I realized that the way Jillio is using it that it has another meaning than the one I know. One thing about the English language is that a single word can have several meanings and the meaning of it can depend on the context.

 

[deafskeptic]

CORRECTION: I got the word pragmatics confused with the word pragmatic. :Oops:

 

[jillio]

Fuzzy: I had stopped reading this thread and other posts by you because I thought I was wasting my time. But I decided that wasn't fair to you. So I want to answer you sincerely and completely. In fact, I wrote something out and had my English major roommate help rewrite it so you will understand every point I am trying to make. She is hearing but reads AD and agrees with me.

I don't "see evil in everything" you write. I don't think you are evil. I don't even think you try to start fights or drama. But fights and drama happen again and again, right? Why?

You first asked "aren't we wasting time settling for HAs when better and better CI is available" and "why still settle for HAs?". Some replies (one was mine) said you were being negative about HAs. Liebling said "You should write "pros/cons between HA and CI" or "advantages/disadvantages between HA and CI" instead of "Aren't we wasting time with HAs"..." You didn't repond to Liebling.

Maybe you don't mean this, but your language seen by many as negative and arguementative. Do you care? You seem to care. You said about another thread "That thread Cheri, and many other, would do perfectly well WITHOUT such an assinine comments. In fact I firmly believe it's because of too many such comments there is such a nasty attitude on AD. " I don't see a nasty attitude on AD. If you see a nasty attitude here, then maybe you should think about your posts too. What attitudes are you showing? What responses do you get? Why? How can you make the attitude on AD less nasty?

You say you don't "do such comments". But you cause so much drama. Do so many just misunderstand you? Maybe. If so, you need to think how you could be understood better. Maybe writing more positively, like Liebling suggested, would help start a thread that does not involve fighting and has the interesting discussion you want. You wrote that the difference with "are we wasting our time" and "aren't we wasting our time" is "VERY important" to you. Yes. Little changes can make writing negative or positive. If seeming less negative to allow for intersting conversation is very important to you, maybe little changes would help. And if you started in a more positive, clear way, maybe you wouldn't get into arguements over little words like "we" and "aren't" - you could avoid this and just have a real discussion.

I don't know what you will think when you read my reply. It is not meant to be mean. But you are counterproductive. You want conversation but you get fights. Is this all your fault? No. But if you want to change this you need to think about how you contribute. I skip CI threads because of the fighting even though now I need to think about CI versus HAs. My hearing is worse and my HAs aren't working. But the threads are not helpful and I would not ever post here asking for advice - too many fights. Maybe you can help change the attitude. As you said "It depends on your attitude how you view this. You can have positive or negative - up to you."

I could send my reply as a PM, but I might be wrong and others can read my reply and decide.

Thank you if you read the whole reply.

Kaitin

Very well said, Kaitlin.

 

[jillio]

CORRECTION: I got the word pragmatics confused with the word pragmatic. :Oops:

Sorry about that, deafskeptic. Simply put, pragmatics is the social use of language, and understanding what is approriate in various situations, and the way in which language use affects other's reactions to the one attempting to communicate amessage. Someone who is weak in pragmatics may have one idea in their head.but when attempting to communicate the idea in their head uses language in such a way that the origninal idea is not communicated at all, but rather comes across as something else entirely.....usually offensive and innapropriate. Others react to what is communicated, not what is intended. An inabliltiy to understand what has been phrased incorrectly, and to see the responsibility lies with the one who has obviously made errors in their use of language is a cardinal sign of difficulties in pragmatics. Just as we all keep telling Fuzzy where she is making errors and offending others, and she refuses to see that it is herself, and instead lays blame on the incorrect assumption that she is using language properly and the fault is in our inability to understand what she is saying.

 

[Cheri]

The thread is about: ~ the technology like CI is out there, more and more people are being happy with it - but why aren't even more interested in it, if they use HAs. Obviously, if somebody use HAs it is because one wants to hear, right?

We know that cochlear implants are out there, When hearing aids were the first technology device out there for the deaf, They used to convinced deaf people that hearing aids helps to speak better, to hear perfectly and to improve on their reading and writing skills, now that cochlear implant came out, the same exact words were been said about cochlear implant as it did with hearing aids.

Let me say this one more time, NOT everyone is a candidate for cochlear implant, and It MAY nor MAY NOT work for each individuals, it's the same goes for hearing aids as well.

Just because some experiences their cochlear implants with positive outcome, it doesn't mean it'll work for this person, and that person.. It's depends upon the individual, not every one of us have the same amount of hearing, same amount of hearing loss, same amount of what we received from either cochlear implant or hearing aids.

Cochlear implants are often pushed in some instances, thinking it's better than what we are wearing now with hearing aids, the question is HOW DO YOU KNOW? It's so wrong to give them false impression that cochlear implants beats it all when one doesn't know how much hearing they are receiving from their hearing aids.

It's even more wrong to shovel cochlear implants down everyone throat thinking this technology device is a miracle, based on how much hearing they will received when it's not even no where near the truth, It all depends upon the individual-- how much sounds, how much words, how much hearing they received or understands. Don't give them high expectations when you can't predict the future.

just my two cents.

 

[jillio]

We know that cochlear implants are out there, When hearing aids were the first technology device out there for the deaf, They used to convinced deaf people that hearing aids helps to speak better, to hear perfectly and to improve on their reading and writing skills, now that cochlear implant came out, the same exact words were been said about cochlear implant as it did with hearing aids.

Let me say this one more time, NOT everyone is a candidate for cochlear implant, and It MAY nor MAY NOT work for each individuals, it's the same goes for hearing aids as well.

Just because some experiences their cochlear implants with positive outcome, it doesn't mean it'll work for this person, and that person.. It's depends upon the individual, not every one of us have the same amount of hearing, same amount of hearing loss, same amount of what we received from either cochlear implant or hearing aids.

Cochlear implants are often pushed in some instances, thinking it's better than what we are wearing now with hearing aids, the question is HOW DO YOU KNOW? It's so wrong to give them false impression that cochlear implants beats it all when one doesn't know how much hearing they are receiving from their hearing aids.

It's even more wrong to shovel cochlear implants down everyone throat thinking this technology device is a miracle, based on how much hearing they will received when it's not even no where near the truth, It all depends upon the individual-- how much sounds, how much words, how much hearing they received or understands. Don't give them high expectations when you can't predict the future.

just my two cents.

Agreed. It is all about the individual. Why should the indiviudal who is able to live, work, and be successful without a CI be subjected to the constant push to have one? If it's something that someone wants,a nd qualifies for, then go for it. But if others are satisfied with the way things are, then they are entitled to live the way they choose for themselves.

And, there are criteria for qualification. Those criteria are in place because even the medical profession realizes that CI is not for everyone, and that doing a surgeryt hat is not likely to provide much benefit is not ethical. Likewise, those who are still receiving a good deal of benefit from HA do not qualify, because to do an invasive surgical procedure when there are ways to adaquately address the issue without surgery is unethical.

CI is not a cure-all. There are those who qualify that choose not to have the implant, and there are those who don't qualify that would choose if circumstances were different. It is dependent upon the recipients motivation and value system.

 

[Cheri]

Agreed. It is all about the individual. Why should the indiviudal who is able to live, work, and be successful without a CI be subjected to the constant push to have one? If it's something that someone wants,a nd qualifies for, then go for it. But if others are satisfied with the way things are, then they are entitled to live the way they choose for themselves.

And, there are criteria for qualification. Those criteria are in place because even the medical profession realizes that CI is not for everyone, and that doing a surgeryt hat is not likely to provide much benefit is not ethical. Likewise, those who are still receiving a good deal of benefit from HA do not qualify, because to do an invasive surgical procedure when there are ways to adaquately address the issue without surgery is unethical.

CI is not a cure-all. There are those who qualify that choose not to have the implant, and there are those who don't qualify that would choose if circumstances were different. It is dependent upon the recipients motivation and value system.

Agreed. That's what some of us were saying from the get and go, it's a personal choice decision should be made upon that individual alone without anyone butting-in asking if we're wasting time with our certain device.

 

[highlands]

Agreed. That's what some of us were saying from the get and go, it's a personal choice decision should be made upon that individual alone without anyone butting-in asking if we're wasting time with our certain device.

yes, personal choice.. took me two years to decide.. not easy.. there are pros and many cons. it's wrong to push people to get a CI

 

[InTheGenes]

I heard it mentioned recently that SUPPOSEDLY, some audiology and doctor's offices receive kickbacks (ie, $$$ compensation) for referring patients to certain CI vendors.

Does anyone know if there is any truth to these rumors?? If so, I can see why some doctors and audiologists are so quick to sway their patients in that direction, if they stand to benefit monetarily from it. I find that extremely unethical, however.

 

[Angel]

Cheri, Jillioie, and Highlands...

 

[highlands]

I heard it mentioned recently that SUPPOSEDLY, some audiology and doctor's offices receive kickbacks (ie, $$$ compensation) for referring patients to certain CI vendors.

Does anyone know if there is any truth to these rumors?? If so, I can see why some doctors and audiologists are so quick to sway their patients in that direction, if they stand to benefit monetarily from it. I find that extremely unethical, however.

yes,you may be right..CIs are expensive and insurance pay for it when one qualifies so profits of sellers are also high.. sometimes some ENTs and sellers work together and 'share' profits..you visit an ENT then they direct you to a certain seller(specialist audiologist) .. you can guess the rest

 

[rockdrummer]

Originally Posted by Audiofuzzy
Sure it requires surgery but the quality of hearing is without hesistation so much better. So why still settle for HAs?Fuzzy

Originally Posted by Rockdrummer
hmmmm... Is it really? From what I understand in certian cases it may even become worse. I am no expert but given what I have learned and experienced it seems to me that a CI is still somewhat of a crap shoot. Do the ends justify the means? How would you feel if you knew that (just an example) 50% of implants either failed and made your residual hearing worse? Would you think it's worth the risk? And do you honestly believe you have access to accurate up to date information to even make an informed decision?

Fuzzy never answered my questions... bumping up hoping for answers.

 

[jillio]

I heard it mentioned recently that SUPPOSEDLY, some audiology and doctor's offices receive kickbacks (ie, $$$ compensation) for referring patients to certain CI vendors.

Does anyone know if there is any truth to these rumors?? If so, I can see why some doctors and audiologists are so quick to sway their patients in that direction, if they stand to benefit monetarily from it. I find that extremely unethical, however.

Its illegal, too, but it does happen. They cannot receive cash, but they do receive "incentives" for using specific brand name devises.

 

[jag]

yes, personal choice.. took me two years to decide.. not easy.. there are pros and many cons. it's wrong to push people to get a CI

Some people like to go faster. I took hmm, 3 months from calling in for the my inital evaluation to decide. Decided on the 2nd one which was about 2 months following the first one. Had surgery one month later. Having a blast ever since.

 

[vallee]

when I decided for CI, my audie gave me three boxes from each of the companies. She showed all the boxes and the speech processors. She told me not to make a choice there, but to read and research each one. I even asked which one she liked the best, she said I should make my own opinion.

I did research. I picked the one that I thought best "fit me." So if she got a "kickback", she was sure neutral on explaining it to me. I have the upmost respect for her.