substituting or is this what he hears?

[DeafCaroline]

My parents weren't very sure either so no official diagnosis was made till I was about 3 and a half. Don't kick yourself.

Yeah, oral is bad for a kid who cannot hear well. They miss out way too much. And there ARE sounds in ASL class, just not speech and honestly, in class, it's very difficult to follow what anyone is saying, one can lipread very well if the person is in front of them enunciating well and not moving around, looking away, turning to the board, the list goes on and on.

I know it's confusing for you, trying to figure all this out, but there's one undeniable truth - a child who cannot hear will be struggling in an oral situation where hearing is required for learning and socializing with one's peers. They miss out on a lot and it can affect them quite profoundly. There are many of us here who grew up oral and mainstreamed and were deeply unhappy and in some cases, traumatized.

An implanted child would fare better due to having greater hearing so for them, it's not as much of a struggle and some do very very well. But right now, your child is not implanted and depending if his levels stabilize, he may not be for a long while. So, it's better for him to be in an environment where he's not daily reminded of what he's NOT hearing and can easily follow what's happening in class and be engaged and involved.

 

[posts from hell]

I'm saddened but not surprised to hear that all the information contradicts eachother.

Which would make more sense to you - finding these who have the same experience (ie deaf people) and ask them what they would do, or listen to hearing people that are professionals?

This guy puts it the best, and the video is captioned. Watch the first 20 seconds.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvjTcBzDbDA]Project Humanity: Invest - YouTube[/ame]
(the video is on www.facunodelement.com, btw)

He put it the best, a loop, repetitive cycle. He's referring to the medical views.

I say this though, whatever you do... Include ASL, please.

 

[rick48]

dhn121,

Can you clarify something. Who tested your child for a cochlear implant - an implant center or an audiologist not connected to an implant center?

Also, even among implant centers there are differences, as Grendel points out in her list of criteria. We have friends whose daughter was a grade older than ours and after witnessing our daughter's post-ci progress took her to be evaluated but our ci center but they said she was borderline but did not qualify, they went to another ci center who said while she tested borderline she did qualify. She went on to be valedictorian of her college.

I would strongly suggest that you consider joining a forum such as the ci circle which is comprised mainly of parents of ci children or those considering a ci for their child. You may meet someone who is in or had the same experiences as you.

Good luck,
Rick

 

[shel90]

that's a bad thing?

I was told by the professional that he needs access to sound and learns from other kids. The TC teacher showed me a bunch of studies that points back to how TC is really better. The speech pathologist gave a bunch of studies that shows how access to speech/oral is better. Everyone told me there's no reason he couldn't speak and be a part of everything and be caught up. He still had plenty of time.

To be honest I didn't know anyone who was DHH unless they're a SR who even wore hearing aids. I didn't even know about CI until we found out about our son was. So for the first 3-6 months I was reading and trying to learn everything on my own. a lot of information was given and they all kind of contradict each other. All very confusing. All very new and overwhelming. kicking myself for not knowing he couldn't hear me. I remember during that time, everyone I met with a child with hearing aids or CI, I would ask, when did you know.

I honestly did not know. His older brother didn't speak until 3. went right to reading and doing complete sentences at 3 1/2. I tested him, went through all that worring asking and checking why he was speaking. turns out he just didn't feel like it. my mom told me I did the same thing. so when my youngest came along, I didn't think anything of it. and kept saying he'll just do it on his own time.

Sometimes it is ok if a child doesnt have speech skills as long as he/she has a strong foundation in language. My brother is one of them. He is living an independent life and working which is more than what many people can do in this economy. The speech therapists and those in the medical community are famous for making children suffer until it is too late for the sake of makign the child "hearing".

 

[deafskeptic]

I am almost 65 years old and I still substitute letters or add letters that belong in a word. I add 't' after an 's' so when I tell my dogs to 'sit' people think I am
saying 'shit'! My daughter said sound that! People would look when I told Finlay to 'sit' when I had him in a store.

I just had to laugh when I imagine those people thinking you're telling your dog to shit on the floor.

 

[AlleyCat]

I just had to laugh when I imagine those people thinking you're telling your dog to shit on the floor.

I was thinking the same thing!

 

[shel90]

I just had to laugh when I imagine those people thinking you're telling your dog to shit on the floor.

 

[Jazzberry]

<snip>

I was told by the professional that he needs access to sound and learns from other kids. The TC teacher showed me a bunch of studies that points back to how TC is really better. The speech pathologist gave a bunch of studies that shows how access to speech/oral is better. Everyone told me there's no reason he couldn't speak and be a part of everything and be caught up. He still had plenty of time.

<snip> So for the first 3-6 months I was reading and trying to learn everything on my own. a lot of information was given and they all kind of contradict each other. All very confusing.

<snip>

I agree with what DeafCaroline, PFH and Shel90 just posted.

Also, consider this: Most children find school challenging; after all what would be the point if they didn't?

In an oral program, your son is being expected to learn everything that most children his age learn, all through his weakest sense. That is simply not logical.

If you haven't read this thread yet, I recommend it. And as of today, it's still short! It's about a blog post by a parent of a deaf child writing her thoughts about how the health profession provides information to parents of deaf children.

And here's my post with my opinion on the subject - link.

I also recommend the short book [ame="http://www.amazon.com/Everyone-Here-Spoke-Sign-Language/dp/067427041X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1318776460&sr=8-1"]Everyone Here Spoke Sign Language[/ame]. (If you prefer to borrow the book - you may be able to get it through your local library, or your library may be part of a interlibray book borrowing system. )

It's a short book but it explains a lot. While it's primarily a history of the deaf community that lived in Martha Vinyard for several hundred years -- the author goes into some other history as well. The author discusses how after the establishment of schools for the deaf but before the Milan Conference, many deaf people were considered to be among the most educated people in their communities. Their schools used sign language and employed deaf teachers. It was only after the Milan Conference (late 1800s) that this changed. Some deaf people succeeded under the oral system (there are always going to be exceptions), but many did not.

The book also explains a little bit about some of the history of audism.

Never underestimate how far some people will go to push their system no matter how illogical it is. For one example -- see the Rochester Method. This was in use at some schools for as long as 70 years!

Imagine if someone said to you from now on you can no longer speak in words. It is far superior to spell everything out, you will be better off and more educated for doing so. From now on, anytime you have something to say -- s-a-y i-t b-y s-p-e-l-l-i-n-g. N-o m-o-r-e w-o-r-d-s! O-n-l-y-s-p-e-l-l-i-n-g!

 

[rick48]

that's a bad thing?

I was told by the professional that he needs access to sound and learns from other kids. The TC teacher showed me a bunch of studies that points back to how TC is really better. The speech pathologist gave a bunch of studies that shows how access to speech/oral is better. Everyone told me there's no reason he couldn't speak and be a part of everything and be caught up. He still had plenty of time.

dhn121,

That is both the good and bad thing about studies: there is one to support every method, the oral only has their studies, the sign only methodology has their studies to show you they are right and the bi-bi their studies and so on and so on....

Remember this, your child is not a study but a unique individual with his own needs and what works for some will not for others and visa versa. Focus on what works best for your child and be wary of those who say their method is the best. My daughter was raised orally and fully mainstreamed as were many others we know but what made it work well for her and for them was the fact that they had very good spoken/oral skills. I am not saying that having them is a guarantee or one cannot have a positive mainstream experience without them but based on my personal observations there is a high correlation between having those skills and a positive mainstream experience. Likewise, there are several people here who have already expressed the fact that even with good oral/spoken language skills they did not have a positive mainstream experience. Just further support for the fact that there is no one or "best" way to educate or raise a deaf child.

Just remember whatever method or educational setting you choose, to keep flexible and to constantly monitor and re-evaluate. These are not decisions that are set in stone and you very well may find that later on a different method and/or educational setting may be the best for your son at that time.

Good luck and best wishes.
Rick

 

[posts from hell]

dhn; keep in mind, Rick's kid currently knows ASL.... for a reason.

 

[rick48]

dhn; keep in mind, Rick's kid currently knows ASL.... for a reason.

I thought my daughter and I were so insignificant to you but yet this is at least your 7th post across two separate threads on this subject. Give it a rest or do you want to make yourself look like a fool yet again? Is this all you do: just troll?

 

[deafskeptic]

I agree with what DeafCaroline, PFH and Shel90 just posted.

Also, consider this: Most children find school challenging; after all what would be the point if they didn't?

In an oral program, your son is being expected to learn everything that most children his age learn, all through his weakest sense. That is simply not logical.

If you haven't read this thread yet, I recommend it. And as of today, it's still short! It's about a blog post by a parent of a deaf child writing her thoughts about how the health profession provides information to parents of deaf children.

And here's my post with my opinion on the subject - link.

I also recommend the short book Everyone Here Spoke Sign Language. (If you prefer to borrow the book - you may be able to get it through your local library, or your library may be part of a interlibray book borrowing system. )

It's a short book but it explains a lot. While it's primarily a history of the deaf community that lived in Martha Vinyard for several hundred years -- the author goes into some other history as well. The author discusses how after the establishment of schools for the deaf but before the Milan Conference, many deaf people were considered to be among the most educated people in their communities. Their schools used sign language and employed deaf teachers. It was only after the Milan Conference (late 1800s) that this changed. Some deaf people succeeded under the oral system (there are always going to be exceptions), but many did not.

The book also explains a little bit about some of the history of audism.

Never underestimate how far some people will go to push their system no matter how illogical it is. For one example -- see the Rochester Method. This was in use at some schools for as long as 70 years!

Imagine if someone said to you from now on you can no longer speak in words. It is far superior to spell everything out, you will be better off and more educated for doing so. From now on, anytime you have something to say -- s-a-y i-t b-y s-p-e-l-l-i-n-g. N-o m-o-r-e w-o-r-d-s! O-n-l-y-s-p-e-l-l-i-n-g!

The Rochester methold was used in some schools for 70 years? Even SEE is preferable to the Rochester methold. I think you have made your case. I'm not going to spell this out or more accurately fingerspell this one out. :P

 

[GrendelQ]

dhn; keep in mind, Rick's kid currently knows ASL.... for a reason.

Good point: getting a CI doesn't limit a child in any way from fully using languages, whether signed or spoken, so you aren't closing any doors by making that decision. Rick's child and my child are both happy, healthy, bimodally multilingual deaf people who can code switch with ease between English and ASL, and interact across Deaf and Hearing worlds.

The decision to get a CI and to learn ASL are not mutually exclusive.

 

[shel90]

Good point: getting a CI doesn't limit a child in any way from fully using languages, whether signed or spoken, so you aren't closing any doors by making that decision. Rick's child and my child are both happy, healthy, bimodally multilingual deaf people who can code switch with ease between English and ASL, and interact across Deaf and Hearing worlds.

And that is what most of us want for all deaf kids but most parents limit them to the oral-only method which is a big shame.

 

[posts from hell]

I thought my daughter and I were so insignificant to you but yet this is at least your 7th post across two separate threads on this subject. Give it a rest or do you want to make yourself look like a fool yet again? Is this all you do: just troll?

Nah. I told dhn whatever she does (I'm allowing her to have the choice, you see) to include ASL.

There is a reason people learn ASL regardless. (By the way, ever seen the "Deaf awakening" thread recently? That is one example.)

This is MY community that we're talking about. You have no idea what it is like to be deaf. I grew up in this, I have countless friends, I have all these experiences and stories. Hence I am throwing in "whatever you do, include ASL" and I stand by that firmly.

I'm sorry you dislike the fact I throw in the 2nd half of your story. Then you go ahead and try to throw in that I am "trolling" in attempt to discredit. But it fits in the consensus. I'm keeping you honest here, pal. It was learned by your daughter for a reason. And we all know what that reason is.

Sorry about that, dhn.

 

[posts from hell]

Good point: getting a CI doesn't limit a child in any way from fully using languages, whether signed or spoken, so you aren't closing any doors by making that decision. Rick's child and my child are both happy, healthy, bimodally multilingual deaf people who can code switch with ease between English and ASL, and interact across Deaf and Hearing worlds.

The decision to get a CI and to learn ASL are not mutually exclusive.

....and where did I say that wasn't the case?

BTW, nice twist again... Fabricating what I say and twisting.

If you need a refresher, read the very last sentence of this post:
http://www.alldeaf.com/hearing-aids...substituting-what-he-hears-5.html#post1940457

 

[AlleyCat]

dhn; keep in mind, Rick's kid currently knows ASL.... for a reason.

Yes. You have to wonder why, the minute she leaves home, she goes and learns ASL.

 

[posts from hell]

Yes. You have to wonder why, the minute she leaves home, she goes and learns ASL.

Countless others on AllDeaf have learned ASL after they have became adults as well. Even the late deafened. We can ask them for their input.

All honest here, I'd appreciate their input more than the medical professionals that have never experienced a footstep in our world.

 

[shel90]

Countless others on AllDeaf have learned ASL after they have became adults as well. Even the late deafened. We can ask them for their input.

All honest here, I'd appreciate their input more than the medical professionals that have never experienced a footstep in our world.[/QUOTE]

Same here...

So many newcomers who are deaf or late deafened come in here saying they wish they could belong to the Deaf world but are afraid to try due to not knowing ASL. It is a shame, isnt it?

 

[GrendelQ]

...It was learned by your daughter for a reason. And we all know what that reason is. .

First, not sure why you are posting about Rick's daughter knowing ASL as though it's a bad thing or something to ridicule or somehow undermines how successful she is as a person. You do know that people with CIs can also use ASL, right? If I remember right -- going back 4-5 years or so, Rick once said that his family exposed his daughter to ASL, and it's been her decision to use it or not throughout her life. What do you mean by 'we all know what that reason is?'

Second, why are you posting about someone else's child, one you don't know, to begin with? Let's say I took it upon myself to say -- hypothetically-speaking --"Oh, PFH's deaf daughter has attended an oral/mainstream program for years for a reason and we all know what that reason is"? It wouldn't be a negative thing to say where she is placed, if you've brought up her placement, but it would be odd to assume that I or anyone else may know the reasons behind your family's decision or your daughter's decisions.