What do you consider "little benefit from HA?"

...plus the fact that some Deaf implantees are curious about what it is like to hear. once their curiosity is satisfied and the novelty of having a ci wears off, they stop wearing their implant permanently.
 
Daredevel7 said:
I agree, I think everyone should have a chance. Unfortunately, we dont know much in terms of fiscal/risk/probability matters, so there's probably something we don't know.
Click to expand...

Ohhhh a conspiracy, perhaps? :giggle:
 
Hear Again said:
...plus the fact that some Deaf implantees are curious about what it is like to hear. once their curiosity is satisfied and the novelty of having a ci wears off, they stop wearing their ci permanently.
Click to expand...

That's their own personal decision...they are the ones who have to live with it. I admit I am curious about it and I wish I can just put one on without having to go thru the surgery.
 
shel90 said:
That's their own personal decision...they are the ones who have to live with it. I admit I am curious about it and I wish I can just put one on without having to go thru the surgery.
Click to expand...

...but it's also a waste of money. if a Deaf person wants a ci simply to satisfy their curiosity but eventually stops wearing it, that's $40-$60,000 down the drain.
 
Hear Again said:
...but it's also a waste of money. if a Deaf person wants a ci simply to satisfy their curiosity but eventually stops wearing it, that's $40-$60,000 down the drain.
Click to expand...

Oh well...just like so much money has been wasted on children getting CIs only to end up with no benefit from them. Yet, nobody has the right to deny anyone a chance to "hear".
 
shel90 said:
Oh well...just like so much money has been wasted on children getting CIs only to end up with no benefit from them. Yet, nobody has the right to deny anyone a chance to "hear".
Click to expand...

children *shouldn't* be denied the chance to hear. (and why you put that word in quotations, i don't know) children are a different story because in most cases, parents want what's best for their child and believe that a ci will give them more opportunities. parents should be allowed to make that choice for their children. if it turns out that a ci isn't right for them, so be it, but at least ci surgery isn't being done for the sake of "curiosity."
 
Hear Again said:
children *shouldn't* be denied the chance to hear. (and why you put that word in quotations, i don't know) children are a different story because in most cases, parents want what's best for their child and believe that a ci will give them more opportunities. parents should be allowed to make that choice for their children. if it turns out that a ci isn't right for them, so be it, but at least ci surgery isn't being done for the sake of "curiosity."
Click to expand...

To some people "hear" has a different meaning..like I can "hear" with my HAs but to hearing people, that is not considered being able to "hear" hence the quotations.

so it is not money wasted if children werent able to benefit from their CIs?
 
shel90 said:
To some people "hear" has a different meaning..like I can "hear" with my HAs but to hearing people, that is not considered being able to "hear" hence the quotations.

so it is not money wasted if children werent able to benefit from their CIs?
Click to expand...

It has to do with probability. Which has a higher chance of money wasted:

Children who benefit from their CIs, forced by their parents to take therapy, and so on?

Adults who do it for the sake of curiousity?
 
Daredevel7 said:
It has to do with probability. Which has a higher chance of money wasted:

Children who benefit from their CIs, forced by their parents to take therapy, and so on?

Adults who do it for the sake of curiousity?
Click to expand...



I just think that is a view that nobody should have to use as a justification to deny people candidancy for a CI. That's just my opinion.
 
Daredevel7 said:
It has to do with probability. Which has a higher chance of money wasted:

Children who benefit from their CIs, forced by their parents to take therapy, and so on?

Adults who do it for the sake of curiousity?
Click to expand...

That's exactly why I chose not to do this right now. If it were all about curiousity, and I was indeed qualified for one by my CI audi in November, I would have done it already (or as soon as I could get surgery scheduled.) But with what my CI audi thought the end results would be for me, that made me decide not to do a CI right now.
 
shel90 said:
To some people "hear" has a different meaning..like I can "hear" with my HAs but to hearing people, that is not considered being able to "hear" hence the quotations.

so it is not money wasted if children werent able to benefit from their CIs?
Click to expand...

no it's not because children who are implanted at an early age have a much higher rate of success with a ci (as proven by research) than do Deaf adults who have never heard before.
 
parents who choose to implant their child are not doing it for the sake of curiosity. if it turns out that a child is unsuccessful with a ci, it is not money wasted because the intent of an implant was to provide that child with hearing to benefit them at school and other environments. an adult who was born Deaf and wants a ci for curiosity's sake and later decides to ditch the implant *is* wasting money because his/her ci could have been used for someone who really wanted to put an effort into understanding speech or recognizing environmental sounds.
 
Hear Again said:
no it's not because children who are implanted at an early age have a much higher rate of success with a ci (as proven by research) than do Deaf adults who have never heard before.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Honestly, everything is about probability in order to conserve resources. In theory, we'd LOVE to give free drug rehab for every drug addict out there, but those who have poor living conditions, poor education, poor mental state, are LESS likely to utilize rehab. Same for giving deaf people every single educational option in every single town in US. We'd like to do that but....ultimately, sadly, it's about allocating resources for those who are more likely to succeed.
 
Daredevel7 said:
Exactly. Honestly, everything is about probability in order to conserve resources. In theory, we'd LOVE to give free drug rehab for every drug addict out there, but those who have poor living conditions, poor education, poor mental state, are LESS likely to utilize rehab. Same for giving deaf people every single educational option in every single town in US. We'd like to do that but....ultimately, sadly, it's about allocating resources for those who are more likely to succeed.
Click to expand...

that's right. this is exactly the reason why my ci center only implants 7 people a year. they want to make sure that those who are interested in getting a ci will actually use it.
 
Daredevel7 said:
Exactly. Honestly, everything is about probability in order to conserve resources. In theory, we'd LOVE to give free drug rehab for every drug addict out there, but those who have poor living conditions, poor education, poor mental state, are LESS likely to utilize rehab. Same for giving deaf people every single educational option in every single town in US. We'd like to do that but....ultimately, sadly, it's about allocating resources for those who are more likely to succeed.
Click to expand...

I think we probably need to find resources for education for everyone. Predicting which deaf are most likely to succeed and giving it all to them, is something I think most people would be upset about.

Equal opportunity?:hmm:
 
More than likely, if Deaf people REALLY wanted the CI, they can get it. If they wanted to get it for the sake of curiosity, they would give up easily after the surgeon says "It's not recommended that you get the CI." I actually would prefer that, because it sort of eliminates those who are "ehhhhh whatever..." about it. Wouldn't you want the resources to go to those who are willing to work for it?
 
according to the ada, accommodations are provided to *all* deaf, hoh, blind, physically disabled, learning disabled and mentally ill students. having said that, it only allows for enough accommodations to give a student an equal footing -- it doesn't allow for accommodations that go above and beyond what they need to succeed.
 
Daredevel7 said:
More than likely, if Deaf people REALLY wanted the CI, they can get it. If they wanted to get it for the sake of curiosity, they would give up easily after the surgeon says "It's not recommended that you get the CI." I actually would prefer that, because it sort of eliminates those who are "ehhhhh whatever..." about it. Wouldn't you want the resources to go to those who are willing to work for it?
Click to expand...

i would.

giving a ci to a Deaf adult who wants an implant for curiosity's sake is a waste of time, money and resources unless that person chooses to continue wearing their ci on a daily basis.
 
shel90 said:
Kinda reminds me of that documentary on HBO about the deaf couple in their 50s or 60s who decided to get a CI and the mother having such high expectations only to get very emotional and depressed when the CI didnt meet her expections but the hubby just being glad to hear what he can hear. I forgot the name of the documentary but it was made by their daughter.
Click to expand...

The movie is called "Hear and Now". :)
 
AlleyCat said:
If I lost more hearing, then yes. Right now my HAs are just a supplement for sound awareness - pretty much what I said in my earlier post. I did visit a CI audi in November and was qualified for one, but she said my speech discrimination would NOT significantly improve. And it was only 6% now. And the speech discrimination was the main goal of a CI for me, so I opted not to get one. But if I lost more hearing, then I will definitely re-visit the idea.



That makes total sense. It kind of ties in with what I was just saying in that my speech discrimination is only 6% now, and the CI audi didn't think that would improve much for me at all with a CI. She must be thinking that the innate ability to process speech wouldn't change much for me.
Click to expand...


I'm sorry, but I find the statement that just because you have a low sentence discrimination and the audiologist think that you would not significantly improve is a bunch of bullcrap.

I have 6% in my left ear...seriously. It's now more than 60%. I could not believe how POOR my sentence discrimination was. I thought it would be higher than that. After doing self-therapy and self-training, I was able to improve a lot.

Like some other people said and stuff...I HONESTLY think that anyone who can hear "well" with their HA's and can understand words by talking to people or people talking to them would do great with sentence discrimination. If I speak to someone with my HA's, face to face, I can understand pretty well, but if they turned their back, I would have a hard time. With the CI, it's so much easier.

I honestly think that if you really want to improve your speech discrimination, you'll do great if you do the training and have experience hearing people talk. With CI, I find that I can understand much more clearer because I was sorely missing the highs. If you don't talk to hearing people or don't really "listen" or can't hear lyrics of music at ALL (I mean if you seriously cannot follow lyrics), then CI is not for you.

I hope I made myself clear, but I'm not trying to put down your audiologist or anything, but to have the reason why you can't get CI is because your audiologist feels it will not improve...in a way it's putting you down.
 
Back
Top