GEEZ! Here we go with this BS!

[jillio]

Need a CI? Come on..many of us grew up oral-only without a CI.

Now, CIs are required?

No wonder I despite the oral-only philosophy. My friend is an oral deaf but she was forced to put her sons in a TC program all because she didnt want them to get CIs.

oh boy...

The world is going nuts.

Too many people trying to speak for others when they have never tried to see things from the different perspective. Same old, same old. The hearing telling the deaf what they need. :roll:

 

[jillio]

No, the oral only philosophy seems to discriminate anyone who is not functioning as hearing as they can. Before, it was about speech skills, ASL and now against those who dont have CIs. Their agenda is to make all deaf children as hearing as they can. I am not stupid.

Bingo. The agenda is "A little hearing is better than no hearing at all." "Hearing is preferable to deafness." "Spoken language is superior to signed language." The agenda hasn't changed since Milan. The only difference is the change in technology. The audist philosophy remains the same and is the basis of the oral only philosophy.

 

[Bebonang]

I was about to waste my energy at the Idiot guy for saying disgracing and terrible language against the Deaf who does not want CI. No wonder many hearing people have no knowledge about our deafness experiences and how hard we struggle that we despise the hardship. Trying to make us hear and to lipread is a big punishment every time hearing people think that we can understand the hearing people. As for faire jour, she is just like the rest of the hearing population who insist that children should get CI to improve their life better than the hearing aids. Still, surgery is not the way to go anyway. That is what bug me so much that I would get angry about comments saying that mainstream is a way to go including a must for children to get CI and all that BS.

Okay, I will try to laugh at his ignoring idiot looking down at us for being dump and stupid. I hate that anyway. This just make me sad.

 

[Speedy Hawk]

It happening similar sort of thing in UK. More and more kids getting CI, oral school are getting loads of CI kids. Non CI kids and BSL users, if they are lucky to get in TC or BSL school get in otherwise go to mainstream. Some non CI will go to oral school if there is space. The well known Deaf schools still take in most non CI kids and BSL users, glad of that. So many have close down now. I read in British Deaf Tennis book says there used to be around 75 in Deaf schools in UK in 1960s and more earlier back in time and now there only 20 or less.

 

[Miss-Delectable]

Well, when these oralists became deaf in their old age, we'll just laugh at them and say 'now you know how we feel'.

 

[rick48]

As for faire jour, she is just like the rest of the hearing population who insist that children should get CI to improve their life better than the hearing aids.

That is not what faire jour has been saying and that characterization of her comments is way off base. Not once has she, or the other parents of ci children still left on this forum, advocated the position that deaf children should get cochlear implants in order to improve their lives.

However, what she and many other parents of cochlear implanted children as well as adult implant users have said is that for their children or for them personally, the cochlear implant has given them improved access to sound and speech over hearing aids. It is also based on personal observations of other, NOT ALL, children and adults who have cochlear implants as well.

Rick

 

[flip]

That is not what faire jour has been saying and that characterization of her comments is way off base. Not once has she, or the other parents of ci children still left on this forum, advocated the position that deaf children should get cochlear implants in order to improve their lives.

However, what she and many other parents of cochlear implanted children as well as adult implant users have said is that for their children or for them personally, the cochlear implant has given them improved access to sound and speech over hearing aids. It is also based on personal observations of other, NOT ALL, children and adults who have cochlear implants as well.

Rick

Basically correct. My experiences with the implant community have given me that impression that they are generally more optimistic than others hearing and deaf.

AllDeaf.com - View Single Post - How to Decide on Cochlear Implant Surgery for Children

Is this a case of chronic oral diarrhea?

 

[GrendelQ]

As for faire jour, she is just like the rest of the hearing population who insist that children should get CI to improve their life better than the hearing aids. (

Bebonang, I agree with Rick, why would you write this? Faire Jour has not insisted or even suggested that children should get CIs to improve their lives better than hearing aids. She speaks positively about her daughter's experience, but has always been very much pro-ASL, and very much for the option as one of several choices, not a requirement.

She's supporting Shel's view that an oral learning environment is NOT the most effective placement for a deaf child who doesn't have CIs. School professionals who suggest a bi-bi placement rather than an oral or AV program or a mainstream placement for an unaided child (unless CIs are planned) may be acting in a realistic, responsible manner, rather than a coercive one.

 

[rick48]

AllDeaf.com - View Single Post - How to Decide on Cochlear Implant Surgery for Children

Is this a case of chronic oral diarrhea?

Next time wait for the meds to kick in before posting. What that post has to do with this topic is absolutely nothing. However it is a little freaky, boarder line scary, that you are lurking around with an old post just waiting for the opportunity, no matter how unrelated or illogical, to whip it out. You really need to get out a little more.

 

[Hask12]

I thought we were going to ignore this guy?

 

[rick48]

Bebonang, I agree with Rick, why would you write this? Faire Jour has not insisted or even suggested that children should get CIs to improve their lives better than hearing aids. She speaks positively about her daughter's experience, but has always been very much pro-ASL, and very much for the option as one of several choices, not a requirement.

She's supporting Shel's view that an oral learning environment is NOT the most effective placement for a deaf child who doesn't have CIs. School professionals who suggest a bi-bi placement rather than an oral or AV program or a mainstream placement for an unaided child (unless CIs are planned) may be acting in a realistic, responsible manner, rather than a coercive one.

Agree and perhaps suggesting to a parent of profoundly deaf children in an oral program to consider a cochlear implant is an instance wherein the school may have a more realistic assessment of the child's oral progress and development than the parent. It may be a situation where they see the daily struggle of the children to attain those "very good oral skills". In that instance, suggesting a cochlear implant is not out of line.

Rick

PS was in the Boston area last weekend.

 

[flip]

I thought we were going to ignore this guy?

My bad. I got a lot to do nowdays, and haven't been here for awhile,(not everyone is lurking around like Rick48), and couldn't resist pick on one of his nummerous contractions. Thanks for the ignore reminder. Must remember to go after people my size, not those below me. Dang!

 

[shel90]

Bebonang, I agree with Rick, why would you write this? Faire Jour has not insisted or even suggested that children should get CIs to improve their lives better than hearing aids. She speaks positively about her daughter's experience, but has always been very much pro-ASL, and very much for the option as one of several choices, not a requirement.

She's supporting Shel's view that an oral learning environment is NOT the most effective placement for a deaf child who doesn't have CIs. School professionals who suggest a bi-bi placement rather than an oral or AV program or a mainstream placement for an unaided child (unless CIs are planned) may be acting in a realistic, responsible manner, rather than a coercive one.

It is the general attitude that deaf people's lives would be better with CIs hence the point of this thread even though the example used was a poor one. It is sad that society will probably view it that way if they continue to get misinformation about deaf people and CIs..that they will look down on us who dont have CIs or those who choose not to implant their children. Just like my friend experienced at that oral program. She shared experiences of crying alone wondering why she was considered a neglectful parent for not implanting her children...she felt that her accomplishments and hard work as a deaf person without a CI didnt mean anything to those people.

 

[C-NICE]

They just don't get it

I myself will probably eventually go for a CI( as I have a progressive Hearing Loss). That being said what a lot of hearing people don't get is that the individual person has to make the choice of what mode of communication to make use of and what life they wish to live. I feel that a CI down the line is a good option for me but that is the choice I am making for myself. I don't have the right or the knowledge to go make that choice for someone else or most importantly their child!!

 

[AlleyCat]

I find the discussion here interesting. There are really very different perspectives. I've been learning about the direction schools and parents are taking with different children (e.g. oral, ASL, CI, HAs, etc.)

And, Hask12 and Flip, if you can't contribute anything relevant other than "lets ignore this guy", use the IGNORE button. It's there for a reason.

 

[somedeafdudefromPNW]

Wirelessly posted

I think husk12 was referring to the blogger, not rick48.

 

[rolling7]

I myself will probably eventually go for a CI( as I have a progressive Hearing Loss). That being said what a lot of hearing people don't get is that the individual person has to make the choice of what mode of communication to make use of and what life they wish to live. I feel that a CI down the line is a good option for me but that is the choice I am making for myself. I don't have the right or the knowledge to go make that choice for someone else or most importantly their child!!

While I do agree with what you said, your quote is "down the line is a good option". I have long held that CI is still in a testing progression and is, at this time, not worth the risk. Yes, there have been sucess but failure is not an option

 

[faire_jour]

Agree and perhaps suggesting to a parent of profoundly deaf children in an oral program to consider a cochlear implant is an instance wherein the school may have a more realistic assessment of the child's oral progress and development than the parent. It may be a situation where they see the daily struggle of the children to attain those "very good oral skills". In that instance, suggesting a cochlear implant is not out of line.

Rick

PS was in the Boston area last weekend.

I just don't understand...people complain that oral schools allow children who need visual language to fall behind and struggle, but then when the schools act responsibly and recommend that some students should attend visual schools, or say that this student wouldn't benefit from oral only, they are called discriminatory. Do you want them to serve every deaf child, even those who will fall behind and "fail", or do you want them to be responsible and insist that visual kids get visual language?

 

[jillio]

I just don't understand...people complain that oral schools allow children who need visual language to fall behind and struggle, but then when the schools act responsibly and recommend that some students should attend visual schools, or say that this student wouldn't benefit from oral only, they are called discriminatory. Do you want them to serve every deaf child, even those who will fall behind and "fail", or do you want them to be responsible and insist that visual kids get visual language?

It is so simple. Not difficult to understand at all, except when you don't want to understand it. Look at the sequence of events in the post you made. Obvious what the problem is just from that.

 

[shel90]

I just don't understand...people complain that oral schools allow children who need visual language to fall behind and struggle, but then when the schools act responsibly and recommend that some students should attend visual schools, or say that this student wouldn't benefit from oral only, they are called discriminatory. Do you want them to serve every deaf child, even those who will fall behind and "fail", or do you want them to be responsible and insist that visual kids get visual language?

Oh brother..u are a piece of work arent you? This was about making a deaf mother feeling like shit about her decision not to implant. Again, you missed the point. Totally missed it. :roll: