To Implant or Not to Implant? That is my question . . .

[fdagman]

Well, my opinion is of a different slant. I regulate Cochlear Devices at the FDA. My experience with their adverse event reports suggests that the risks must be completely evaluated before you make a decision. Many, many cases of infection and meningitis.

 

[highlands]

Well, my opinion is of a different slant. I regulate Cochlear Devices at the FDA. My experience with their adverse event reports suggests that the risks must be completely evaluated before you make a decision. Many, many cases of infection and meningitis.

I think that is more related the surgery risks than CI itself.

 

[Foxrac]

Thanks for your interest but the criteria in my country is probably more strict than north american countries. I must have at least 95 dbl loss bilaterally so I am not a candidate and PLUS many ENTs or audiologist don't have much background on CIs .. it sucks whenever I want to ask an audi his/her opinion he/she seems not knowing anything about CI and they think HAs should be enough but I can't feel relaxed with hearing aids..they help but they do not offer me speech clarity ... the hardest thing is that I cannot find any expert to get their opinion .. but I will not be giving up on CIs ..

Your welcome, Canada has been strictly about CI surgery, not all deaf people can quality to get one, unlike in USA due government's limitation on free medical service.

I think that Banjo or canadian members can explain about that, I only got learned from deafdyke.

 

[highlands]

Your welcome, Canada has been strictly about CI surgery, not all deaf people can quality to get one, unlike in USA due government's limitation on free medical service.

I think that Banjo or canadian members can explain about that, I only got learned from deafdyke.

Thanks but I am not from Canada , I'm from eastern europe .Yet Banjo's explanation could be helpful for Canadians

 

[DefLord]

I don't like CI's.

I don't like the hype that they get being discribed as a 'cure' instead of just another type of assistive tecnology which is basicly what a CI is really. Some organisations such as Deafblind UK seem to focus exclusively on CI's and don't bother to inform their members about other things such as HA, Tan vibrators, low vision aids, computers, Sonic devices, or any other assistive tecnology. Not much anyway. It seems that just because the CI is so successful for some deafblind people, they recon we should all go and get one. I think that's cruel because not everyone CAN have CI's. Some people just don't qualify for whatever reason. So it's the hype mainly that I don't like about the CI. The idea of a 'cure' also stops people accepting their disability and I think that's also a bad thing.

Another thing I don't like is it's being forced on young children who are too young to make their own mind up. Not only that but some parents also use it as an excuse to deprive their children of BSL and I think it is very bad when this happens.

There is also a 3rd problem is that they CI and other 'advances' are all tested on animals. I am totally against animal testing. It wouldn't be so bad if they had stopped testing animals now that CI works for some people but they keep going on with new models and try having further animal tests as a means to justify implanting babies etc... That is the worst thing about CI really

Every audiologist, physician I have come across all tell me the same thing - it is NOT a cure but it will enhance and help our lives. They tell me over and over I will never hear like a normal hearing person but I will hear MORE than I could with a hearing aid. And up to this point, I agree with them.

 

[gnulinuxman]

I wish there was an option that said "I am hearing, and I know the CI doesn't work for everybody."

 

[fdagman]

I think that is more related the surgery risks than CI itself.

THis is true. But since it requires surgery for insertion, it is a major factor. I have not yet mentioned the reports I get of CI not working.

 

[highlands]

THis is true. But since it requires surgery for insertion, it is a major factor. I have not yet mentioned the reports I get of CI not working.

I would be pleased if I could read about CIs that not working. Glad to see you here in Alldeaf

 

[Hear Again]

Highlands,

I was mistaken...I also thought you were from Canada.

 

[Hear Again]

From what I understand, failure rates for CIs are only 2-3%. One of the difficulties in keeping track of failures is that not all of them may be reported. (For example, soft failures)

 

[Hear Again]

Well, my opinion is of a different slant. I regulate Cochlear Devices at the FDA. My experience with their adverse event reports suggests that the risks must be completely evaluated before you make a decision. Many, many cases of infection and meningitis.

The number of cases of infection and meningitis have gone down significantly over the past few years due to preventative pneumovax vaccines administered before surgery and a much smaller incision (1-2 inches) than what was used years ago.

 

[highlands]

From what I understand, failure rates for CIs are only 2-3%. One of the difficulties in keeping track of failures is that not all of them may be reported. (For example, soft failures)

That's a low rate. I guess , even with hearing aids there is some failure rates . Some people don't want to wear hearing aids for whatever reason... so failure rates should not be discouraging us about CI but we should be careful and know what we're doing.

 

[Hear Again]

I agree Highlands. That's one of the reasons why CI centers are so careful about selecting people for candidacy.

The last thing they want to do is implant someone who is ambivalent as to whether or not they want a CI or has expectations that are too high.

Of course, there's no "fool proof" way of preventing these people from getting CIs. Even if a person is uncertain about whether or not they want to receive a CI, they could still go ahead with the surgery. The same is true for people whose expectations are too high. They could tell the audi or psychologist what he/she wants to hear even though their expectations are way too high.

Unfortunately, I've seen examples of both scenarios and both circumstances make adjusting to the CI that much harder.

 

[sr171soars]

Every audiologist, physician I have come across all tell me the same thing - it is NOT a cure but it will enhance and help our lives. They tell me over and over I will never hear like a normal hearing person but I will hear MORE than I could with a hearing aid. And up to this point, I agree with them.

I concur!

I don't understand where the phrase "CI is a cure for deafness" comes from. To me, it is the best tool I ever have used for hearing with bar none. Just because it allows some of us act or do as the Romans do should not fool ourselves or others into thinking that we are hearing.

 

[neecy]

I concur!

I don't understand where the phrase "CI is a cure for deafness" comes from. To me, it is the best tool I ever have used for hearing with bar none. Just because it allows some of us act or do as the Romans do should not fool ourselves or others into thinking that we are hearing.

I echo this as well - I was never told my CI would completely cure my deafness, but that it would make communication with the hearing world much easier, and that has been true. Your CI will work in proportion to the work YOU put into it. You can't just switch it on and expect perfect hearing - which, unfortunately, is what the anti-CI contingent continuously says people are told.

 

[jillio]

I don't like CI's.

I don't like the hype that they get being discribed as a 'cure' instead of just another type of assistive tecnology which is basicly what a CI is really. Some organisations such as Deafblind UK seem to focus exclusively on CI's and don't bother to inform their members about other things such as HA, Tan vibrators, low vision aids, computers, Sonic devices, or any other assistive tecnology. Not much anyway. It seems that just because the CI is so successful for some deafblind people, they recon we should all go and get one. I think that's cruel because not everyone CAN have CI's. Some people just don't qualify for whatever reason. So it's the hype mainly that I don't like about the CI. The idea of a 'cure' also stops people accepting their disability and I think that's also a bad thing.

Another thing I don't like is it's being forced on young children who are too young to make their own mind up. Not only that but some parents also use it as an excuse to deprive their children of BSL and I think it is very bad when this happens.

There is also a 3rd problem is that they CI and other 'advances' are all tested on animals. I am totally against animal testing. It wouldn't be so bad if they had stopped testing animals now that CI works for some people but they keep going on with new models and try having further animal tests as a means to justify implanting babies etc... That is the worst thing about CI really

 

[shel90]

I concur!

I don't understand where the phrase "CI is a cure for deafness" comes from. To me, it is the best tool I ever have used for hearing with bar none. Just because it allows some of us act or do as the Romans do should not fool ourselves or others into thinking that we are hearing.

The media...how they portrayed the CIs and then the assumptions made from hearing people who watched those shows about children who are successful CI users. I have asked several hearing people and that is what they told me. I did watch one program featuring a deaf girl who got implanted and all the narrator kept repeating was how she can hear this or that. To the public who is not well informed about deafness may interpret that as them being cured.

 

[jillio]

I concur!

I don't understand where the phrase "CI is a cure for deafness" comes from. To me, it is the best tool I ever have used for hearing with bar none. Just because it allows some of us act or do as the Romans do should not fool ourselves or others into thinking that we are hearing.

It comes from the medical community. And it doesn't have the negative effects for persons such as yourself, but when this is sold to hearing parents of deaf children in this manner, it does begin to have negative effects. You understand that it is a tool,and address it as such. There are those hearing parents out there, however, who firmly believe that a CI means that their child will now be able to acquire language in the same way a hearing child does. Perhaps part of the blame lies within the industry, and part on parents who just don't want to face the reality of the situation.

 

[shel90]

It comes from the medical community. And it doesn't have the negative effects for persons such as yourself, but when this is sold to hearing parents of deaf children in this manner, it does begin to have negative effects. You understand that it is a tool,and address it as such. There are those hearing parents out there, however, who firmly believe that a CI means that their child will now be able to acquire language in the same way a hearing child does. Perhaps part of the blame lies within the industry, and part on parents who just don't want to face the reality of the situation.

That too..

 

[R2D2]

It comes from the medical community. And it doesn't have the negative effects for persons such as yourself, but when this is sold to hearing parents of deaf children in this manner, it does begin to have negative effects. You understand that it is a tool,and address it as such. There are those hearing parents out there, however, who firmly believe that a CI means that their child will now be able to acquire language in the same way a hearing child does. Perhaps part of the blame lies within the industry, and part on parents who just don't want to face the reality of the situation.

Speaking for myself and actually having gone through the process, it was never described to me as a "cure". As a matter of fact, the emphasis was given was that it was NOT a cure and that I should continue to use whatever visual cues I found helpful.

I seriously doubt that many doctors and audies sell CIs as a "cure". Just think of all the lawsuits they would expose themselves to knowing that results vary from person to person. They'd have to be stupid to do that especially in a country that has an extensive litigation industry as your own.