Myths and lies about CIs . . .

deafdyke said:
Nah, I'm just saying that some human behavoirs and oddities can be overpathologized, that's all.

Ah. No disagreement here.

deafdyke said:
But still......your roomie would probaly never totally feel comfortable with nereotypicals or function perfectly in nereotypcial society. Maybe he might do slightly better then my college mate......but still......

It's interesting - very much like the conversations we have here about oral deaf, HOH and CI users. His goal is to assimilate - well, maybe not assimilate - and fit into neurotypical society. But he understands that there's always going to be a certain amount of otherness, and that's not a bad thing.
 
Here is an example: VRS Interpreter..working for Deaf people...yet still degrades deaf people...you allow it to happen so what is your point?

:dunno:

does anybody understands what SM tries to say because I sure like he!! don't..

Fuzzy
 
Audiofuzzy said:
:dunno:

does anybody understands what SM tries to say because I sure like he!! don't..

Fuzzy
Sweetmind is stating she doesn't like greedy and/or dishonest hearing people who work for deaf people, especially interpreters and relay operators. Not all; just the bad ones.

I have come across some dishonest interpreters. In fact, some members of this board took it personally and accused me of bigotry because they were convinced in their minds I said all interpreters were that way even though I stated several times that I only said a few...but that's :topic: here... :whistle:
 
Sweetmind said:
I know you are not talking to me about the way I do things, "Mrs. post my nickname and picture with my grandson( for petes sake!) in gay.com" talk about distasteful!
.....................................................
Sweetmind
:topic:

Just start a new topic with your feelings.
Just copy/paste the post...
 
SOURMIND said:
(since you wanna play with the names….after all, I haven’t used that sn in YEARS) I know you are not talking to me about the way I do things, "Mrs. post my nickname and picture with my grandson( for petes sake!) in gay.com" talk about distasteful!
And it is STILL time to get over yourself. I am sure everyone here knows of my misbehavior in the past. No need to continue rehashing it over and over and over and over and over again. Unless of course, you are trying to push me to come up with some new form of annoying you?

SOURMIND said:
And what about the others in this forum who namecall and all the other things I am accused of? Why is no one calling them out? why arent they being banned?
People are banned all the time, maybe it is YOUR turn for a change?

SOURMIND said:
I have done the research on this guy...So its all factual
Your idea of “research” and mine, vary greatly. Erego, it is still an errant OPINION.

SOURMIND said:
Besides, some of you have trashed my name all over this forum.
You do this to yourself, dear.

SOURMIND said:
Dont sit here and tell me what to do, I have tried to be on my best behavior with my posts...
Seems your best just isn’t good enough, huh?

SOURMIND said:
If you cant respect that then Dont Bother US!
DITTO

Okay sorry, I was offtopic, I’m done now….

Just because someone opts for a CI doesn’t mean they are out to demolish the entire deaf culture. Just another MYTH!
 
Just because someone opts for a CI doesn’t mean they are out to demolish the entire deaf culture.
AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This whole issue is not a black and white issue. People on both sides of the debate need to undy that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
 
Okay sorry, I was offtopic, I’m done now….

Just because someone opts for a CI doesn’t mean they are out to demolish the entire deaf culture. Just another MYTH![/QUOTE]

What's going on??? Seems that everyone are off the topic??? Someone already called Sweetmind Sourmind.... and you had namecalled me to Sexpig...What happened??

Thanks!!
SxyPorkie
 
Uh, I never called you anything....as far as I can tell, you and SM are sharing the same brain, so I only felt the need to reply to one of you.
 
Oops!

I just read this: http://www.alldeaf.com/showthread.php?t=29332 and am hereby formally submitting myself to Alex's latest policy and will no longer be a participant in the "attacks" taking place. That being said, I would never attack someone based on their beliefs, only whether or not they make an ass of themselves in the process of proclaiming those beliefs. However, I will put serious effort into not attacking on any basis, henceforth.
 
Since this article has been mentioned as being the authority on CI's, and since this article is so hypocritical and bogus, I wanted to explain why I don't believe this article at all.
Interesting bit of info from WRAD NEWS . . .


MYTHS AND LIES ABOUT COCHLEAR IMPLANTS

WRAD is SHOCKED that there are lies and myths and a lot of wrong
information being spread about cochlear implants and people who choose
to receive cochlear implants to improve their independence, their lives
and their careers.
:roll:
Even much worse, a lot of these LIES are being spread by ASL
Interpreters, apparently for two reasons: (1) They are so fascinated
with "sign language" that they do not want any prelingually deaf person
(born deaf or early deafened) to have the ability to hear or to speak;
and (2) they want the MONEY that comes to them from keeping deaf people
dependent... ON THEM!
This is just paranoia. Interpreters have better things to do than spread lies about cochlear implants.
OK, it is time to STOP these rumors and lies and myths! It is time to
focus on the REAL NEEDS of deaf people, for more independence and more
access to the whole world. Here are the LIES we have been hearing about,
and here is the TRUTH!
Whatever...
LIE #1: THERE IS A "HOLE" IN THE SIDE OF THE HEAD OF A COCHLEAR IMPLANT
RECIPIENT
This is absolute NONSENSE! THERE IS NO "HOLE"! The headpiece attaches
magnetically. There is a small metallic section of the implant under the
scalp skin. There is a magnet in the headpiece. Ask ANYONE you know who
has a cochlear implant to temporarily remove their headpiece and see for
yourself!
This one is basically referring to the hole needed for the surgery.
LIE #2: SOME HEARING PEOPLE "FORCE" DEAF PEOPLE TO GET COCHLEAR IMPLANTS
This is a LIE. No one can "force" anyone to get a cochlear implant (ci).
When a deaf individual wishes to receive INFORMATION about the ci
technology, they must go through a full ci EVALUATION to get INFORMATION
ONLY. These evaluations are done through a certified ci center, and
simply involve a more thorough audiological test; a test of the hearing
nerves (most deaf people have fully functional hearing nerves --
"deafness" is caused by damage to the cells in the cochlea); a CT scan
of the cochlea bones (about 5 minutes for each ear); a discussion and
education session with a ci audiologist; and a full medical evaluation
by an ci-trained ENT physician. These evaluations are for INFORMATION
ONLY, and do not involve "surgery" or any "pressure" by anyone.

[NOTE: If you wish to have a ci evaluation, go to
http://www.bionicear.com/clinics/clinics.html , contact the location
near where you live and ask for a ci evaluation. If you are under an HMO
medical insurance plan, tell your Primary Care Physician (PPO) to refer
you to an ENT specialist within your HMO network for a ci evaluation]
The implantee has NO choice in receiving an implant if the implantee is a baby. Parents can force the surgery on the children (and don't give me any of that "they can remove it" because as this is written it is about the SURGERY ITSELF, not the choice to remove it).
LIE #3: COCHLEAR IMPLANTS ARE "DANGEROUS"
Absolutely WRONG! No one has ever died from ci surgery. In fact, ci
surgery is MICROSURGERY, so small that the surgeon needs to use
magnifying glasses. The entire "surgery" through the skull bone is no
bigger than this typed "O". There are very few side effects after
surgery and all of them are TEMPORARY. Proper care of the stitches after
surgery prevents skin infections. The "meningitis risk" you have been
hearing about is primarily in young children between birth to 6 years
old, and is preventable by a simple immunization (everyone should be
immunized against meningitis anyway).
True.
LIE #4: COCHLEAR IMPLANTS MAKE PEOPLE INTO "ROBOTS" OR "ALIENS"
Absolutely, definitely NOT TRUE! The cochlear implant is simply an inner
ear radio transmitter. It just sits on top of the damaged cells on the
surface of the cochlea bone and sends radio signals of ALL sounds to the
hearing nerves. There is NOTHING "connected to" any nerves of the body
or to the brain.
A CI is not a radio transmitter. It electrically stimulates the nerves.
LIE #5: COCHLEAR IMPLANTS "DESTROY DEAF CULTURE"
No they DON'T! "Deaf Culture" is primarily about the gestural languages
(such as ASL in the USA and Canada), unrelated to spoken phonetic
languages, that are used by BOTH deaf AND hearing people all over the
world. These gestural languages can be learned AT ANY TIME in any
person's life. In fact, many late-deafened people and many ASL
interpreters have proved that gestural languages can be learned at any
age. If an ASL interpreter can have the best of BOTH worlds (gestural
and phonetic), then why can't a deaf person have the same benefits? WE
CAN!
Talking only about the devices this is true. However, it is the attitudes of the implantees that destroy Deaf culture.
LIE #6: COCHLEAR IMPLANTS COST "A LOT OF MONEY"
Not true! All major health insurance plans pay IN FULL for the ci
surgery and TWO sound processors (body-worn and BTE) and all
attachments, and most of them also cover, or reimburse for, all of the
replacement batteries, cords, etc.
Then why are there so many people who can't pay for one? Not all insurance companies do cover this.
LIE #7: COCHLEAR IMPLANTS "DON'T WORK" FOR PRELINGUALLY DEAF ADULTS

WRONG AGAIN! We all have TWO different "auditory systems" in our brains!

The BASIC level of the human auditory system is for identification of
ENVIRONMENTAL sounds. This is called the "WHERE" auditory system, and
this part of the auditory system has ALWAYS BEEN activated and fully
functional, for ALL sounds, for prelingually deaf adults, from the time
the ci is first activated.

The other part of the human auditory system is at a higher level for
understanding of other people when they are speaking. This is called the
"WHAT" (speech identification) part of the auditory system. IN THE PAST,
this benefit was not available to prelingually deaf people because of
limitations of technology. BUT THIS IS NOT TRUE ANYMORE! The most recent
advances in ci technology, in just the past few years, NOW permit
prelingually deaf people to be able to learn listening skills for
understanding human speech.
[...]
Well, well, well, I see some hypocrites around here. I've been seeing some of you claiming that the only possible way to get full benefit of the CI is to implant early, and you also claim this article is 100% true. However, this part contradicts what you keep saying about implanting early!
LIE #8: COCHLEAR IMPLANTS ARE THE SAME AS "HEARING AIDS"
Absolutely WRONG! A hearing aid blasts sound into the outer, middle and
inner ears. For a deaf person, the cells in the inner ear that transmit
sounds are DEAD. If doesn't matter how much sound you blast into the ear
since those sounds won't ever be heard by the auditory nerves. All a
deaf person gets from a hearing aid is VIBRATIONS, not actual sounds,
and a lot of headaches.

A cochlear implant provides direct transmissions to the auditory nerves.
There are NO vibrations at all, and the sounds are very clear and
distinct, ALL SOUNDS, much more than anyone can hear with a hearing aid.
A person with a cochlear implant hears sounds the same way as a hearing
person. Ask ANY hearing person how they "hear sounds" -- they don't feel
ANYTHING AT ALL when they hear! In fact, hearing people don't even know
their ears are there -- they hear in their brain, NOT "in their ear"! So
do ci users, and there are no "earmolds" to bother them either
Hey, I know my ears are there!
LIE #9: COCHLEAR IMPLANT USERS "DISAPPEAR" FROM THEIR OWN DEAF COMMUNITY
No they don't! Most ci users, especially prelingually deaf adults, were
implanted too late in life for their "WHAT" auditory system to be fully
functional, even though their "WHERE" auditory system IS fully
functional, which greatly improves and assists lipreading ability. MOST
ci users DO want to participate in the deaf community, but they are
BEING INSULTED, DEFAMED, EXCLUDED, ISOLATED AND ATTACKED by stupid
people who do not understand the truth about cochlear implants. THIS IS
WRONG! It is WRONG to attack and hurt innocent people in the deaf
community who want to be more independent!
Well, some bring it on themselves with their big "I can hear!" egos.
ASL interpreters, who regularly participate within Deaf Culture and the
deaf community have FULL hearing and speech ability, PLUS the FULL
ability to communicate in gestural language, too. WHAT IS SO "WRONG" IF
DEAF PEOPLE WANT TO DO THE SAME?

If HEARING or even hard of hearing people within the deaf community are
"threatened" by this, then they should NOT BE IN the deaf community or
in OUR Deaf Culture organizations and groups! We who are PHYSICALLY DEAF
have the same rights as everyone else to have as much access as possible
to BOTH the world of sound AND the world of silence!
Then why do so many implantees hate those who DARE speak against cochlear implants? There are two sides to every debate. Besides, I'm not threatened by implantees in the community. I am more offended by those who disrespect the Deaf community and then accuse the Deaf community of being rude to them.
LIE #10: PEOPLE WHO ARE STILL "VOLUNTARILY DEAF" HAVE THE "RIGHT" TO
TALK ABOUT COCHLEAR IMPLANTS
Very, Very, VERY WRONG! NO prelingually deaf person (born deaf or early
deafened) who still chooses to remain deaf has NO RIGHT WHATSOEVER to
talk about cochlear implants! They have NO experience at all in hearing
the FULL RANGE of sounds!

Would you ask a born BLIND individual to choose colors for decorating
your house? No you wouldn't! That person has NO ACTUAL EXPERIENCE with
the full range of colors. And a prelingually deaf person has NO ACTUAL
EXPERIENCE hearing the full range of ALL sounds, either!

It is NOT POSSIBLE for a BORN BLIND OR EARLY BLINDED person to
understand colors, even if you try to explain colors to that person --
colors are OUTSIDE of that person's life experience.

It is also NOT POSSIBLE for a BORN SOUND-BLIND OR EARLY SOUND-BLINDED
person (a born deaf or early deafened prelingually deaf person) to
understand what it is like to hear ALL sounds -- having full auditory
function is OUTSIDE of that person's life experience.
DO NOT LISTEN TO ANYONE WHO DOES NOT KNOW WHAT THEY ARE REALLY TALKING
ABOUT!

If you want to know THE TRUTH, ask someone who DOES know what they are
talking about, from actual professional training (which is NOT given in
"ASL Interpreter Training Programs"), and/or from ACTUAL LIFE
EXPERIENCE!
This one made me laugh the hardest:
1. Not all voluntarily deaf people were born deaf. Many late-deafened people don't want cochlear implants for various reasons, and I can DEFINITELY respect that.
2. Hearing parents have not experienced cochlear implants. By this logic, they shouldn't be allowed to talk about them either.
3. One point keeps being brought up here, even by the cochlear implant users themselves: CI's are NOT perfect. Since they aren't perfect, why is perfect hearing even being brought up here as a reason for "expertise" anyway?
4. If a deaf person decides not to get a cochlear implant, they aren't stupid. It means they're comfortable being deaf, which is OK. They have their own opinions. It looks to me like this one is out there to only allow people to say good things about the CI.

Well, that's my opinion on this article. Not all of it is bogus, but it seems very suspicious and contradictory to me.
 
What goes around and comes around. Truth will come out when time comes. I am not gonna to worry about it. ;)
 
gnulinuxman said:
This one is basically referring to the hole needed for the surgery.
People say, "OMG, you have a hole in your head now". You think they're referring to the now-healed hole that was there for surgery? I doubt it.

gnulinuxman said:
The implantee has NO choice in receiving an implant if the implantee is a baby. Parents can force the surgery on the children (and don't give me any of that "they can remove it" because as this is written it is about the SURGERY ITSELF, not the choice to remove it).
You might as well talk about parents "forcing" their kids to sign.

gnulinuxman said:
Talking only about the devices this is true. However, it is the attitudes of the implantees that destroy Deaf culture.

And why is it, do you think, that so many people with CIs are not enchanted by Deaf culture? Could it be that they've seen how they're treated, and decided that's not a group they want to embrace?

gnulinuxman said:
Then why are there so many people who can't pay for one? Not all insurance companies do cover this.

There are many people who can't pay for a CI because they don't have insurance, or because they don't really qualify (and aren't you one of the folks here saying we need stricter candidacy requirements?).

gnulinuxman said:
Well, well, well, I see some hypocrites around here. I've been seeing some of you claiming that the only possible way to get full benefit of the CI is to implant early, and you also claim this article is 100% true. However, this part contradicts what you keep saying about implanting early!

False dichotomy. The benefits are greater the earlier you get it; that doesn't mean it's *impossible* to learn to speak or hear later in life.

gnulinuxman said:
1. Not all voluntarily deaf people were born deaf. Many late-deafened people don't want cochlear implants for various reasons, and I can DEFINITELY respect that.

Then why can't you respect those late- and not-late- deafened people who *do* want CIs for various reasons?

gnulinuxman said:
2. Hearing parents have not experienced cochlear implants. By this logic, they shouldn't be allowed to talk about them either.

Raising a child with a CI implies that you have seen the experience of a CI up close and personal every day for a significant length of time. Not the same as having one; but it's a far cry from "oh, I met a guy ..." or "several of my friends ...".

gnulinuxman said:
4. If a deaf person decides not to get a cochlear implant, they aren't stupid. It means they're comfortable being deaf, which is OK. They have their own opinions. It looks to me like this one is out there to only allow people to say good things about the CI.

I have never heard anyone here say "all deaf people should get CIs". However, I have heard people imply that *no* deaf people should get CIs. Whether or not the community is overly defensive of their choice is debateable, but I think it would certainly be understandable if that was the case, no?
 
ismi said:
People say, "OMG, you have a hole in your head now". You think they're referring to the now-healed hole that was there for surgery? I doubt it.
No comment.
ismi said:
You might as well talk about parents "forcing" their kids to sign.
You obviously weren't paying attention. The article said NOBODY is forced to get cochlear implant surgery, and I proved it wasn't true.
ismi said:
And why is it, do you think, that so many people with CIs are not enchanted by Deaf culture? Could it be that they've seen how they're treated, and decided that's not a group they want to embrace?
It's a vicious cycle, isn't it? It isn't JUST the Deaf community's fault or JUST the implantee's fault. The article is EXTREMELY biased towards the implantees, yet I see they have attitude problems of their own.
ismi said:
There are many people who can't pay for a CI because they don't have insurance, or because they don't really qualify (and aren't you one of the folks here saying we need stricter candidacy requirements?).
YES! This is why the article is WRONG on this point.
ismi said:
False dichotomy. The benefits are greater the earlier you get it; that doesn't mean it's *impossible* to learn to speak or hear later in life.
So, the point is that some on this board claim it is impossible to speak and hear well enough if it's a late surgery.
ismi said:
Then why can't you respect those late- and not-late- deafened people who *do* want CIs for various reasons?
Some of my friends are implantees, and I don't automatically hate people who have them. Unfortunately, you missed me mentioning that elsewhere, and lots of members think I am lying when I say it because they are convinced I hate all implantees. :roll: but the truth is I don't automatically hate people who have CI's, just certain ones. I don't stereotype like that.
ismi said:
Raising a child with a CI implies that you have seen the experience of a CI up close and personal every day for a significant length of time. Not the same as having one; but it's a far cry from "oh, I met a guy ..." or "several of my friends ...".
But in all those cases it still isn't firsthand, which is what the article mentioned.
ismi said:
I have never heard anyone here say "all deaf people should get CIs". However, I have heard people imply that *no* deaf people should get CIs. Whether or not the community is overly defensive of their choice is debateable, but I think it would certainly be understandable if that was the case, no?
Well, the problem is that it is a two-way street, yet many people on either side of it are claiming it is all the other side's fault.
 
Definitely not Harlan Lane said:
Tell the mothers I said, "Help your child; you are the adult, you bear the burden of resposibility to give the child all the possibilities life can give"
:popcorn:
 
It isn't JUST the Deaf community's fault or JUST the implantee's fault.
ismi, not to sound like a Deaf extremist, but deaflinxgeek DOES have a point here. Yes, the Deaf community CAN be kind of "deafer then thou" towards folks it sees as "not really deaf" BUT, as a parcipitant in Deaf culture and a sociologist, I have to say that that attitude isn't exlcusive to the Deaf community. Some oral-only folks can be kind of snobby(to put it mildly) to those who Sign. I really do think that if the major Oral snobs were eliminated, then you'd see more Deaf people being more accepting of those with oral skills. I have seen oral folks being all high and mighty assuming that they are better educated, or more independant or just better in general b/c they can talk.
 
Deafdyke,
There are alot of snobs out there in the world, does not matter if they are related to deaf or not. Just ignore them because you are a better person than them. I ignore them because they are not worth wasting my time. If they decide to become a snob then that is their problem now, not ours.
Cheer up,
:angel:
 
Just to clarify, I've never dealt with the extremist snobs.....closest I've ever gotten is when I spoke at a conference for hoh kids, and the two hoh kids who spoke were the stereotypical wicked high acheiveing "hearing impaired" kids.
 
Back
Top