Why adults choose CI's for their children

[rockdrummer]

Not insulting your intelligence, especially not you.

I dont see how two teachers can disagree about deaf children having the same rights to full access to information. However, some teachers think by putting a deaf child in the front row of a oral-only classroom would solve all the access issues and as a deaf person, myself growing up oral, I know that it is impossible for a deaf child to have equal access to everything as their hearing classmates do. Even some CI users rely on CART or thru a 3rd person to get the same access to language, information, communication, and education while hearing children do not need to go thru a 3rd person.

Yes adequate accessibility is part of the controversy.

As for TC...u already read many reports about it about how two languages are usually used stimulately in which one language usually ends up getting compromised so some children may not get a proper language model. Some people who do not understand language acquisition do not realize that.

One could argue that same point against the bi-bi approach. It almost seems to me that SEE II is the meeting point. A single language model providing access to English visually. Might that be the best of both worlds?

I would never ever call someone an idiot just because they didnt have hands on experience with one particular field of work.

Never, did I say you were all idiots..it is all about experiencing it first-hand..nothing personal. Never did I say it was the parents that didnt have any knowledge..

Fair enough and I didn't mean to put words in your mouth but that's the impression I got from reading your posts where you did suggest that we can't have an opinion or debate on the subject because we don't work in the field.

 

[jillio]

I see your point. Let me see if I understand what you are saying. The people the child come in contact with questions if the child is "really deaf" since they interact and can hear something with a CI. Is that what you mean?

Many children can interact to a degree and hear something with an HA. That does not mean that they are able to interact and hear the same things a hearing child hears. HOH with a CI or HOH with an HA still leaves that child with a deficit in what they are able to perceive in a hearing only environment.

 

[vallee]

You disagree with what? I am not proposing to move a child from any environment. I am proposing to put them in the one that best facillitates their edcuation from the very beginning. Give them the strong foundation that they need so that they are able to make the transitions. Just because a child has become accustomed to a certain environment doesn't mean that it is the most conducive to success or development. An abused child rarely wants to leave their abuser, either, because it is the only environment they know. However, is it the most healthy and conducive environment for that child's mental and emotional development and health?

You're comparing an oral educational environment to child abuse???

And just because they have been in an educational setting does not mean they are marked for failure. You can't just pick up all the deaf children with cochlear implants and move them to deaf school just because you feel it "best facilitates their education." Your making deaf education into one size fits all. Your taking away educational opportunities for children. I disagree with that.

 

[shel90]

You're comparing an oral educational environment to child abuse???

And just because they have been in an educational setting does not mean they are marked for failure. You can't just pick up all the deaf children with cochlear implants and move them to deaf school just because you feel it "best facilitates their education." Your making deaf education into one size fits all. Your taking away educational opportunities for children. I disagree with that.

I think Jillo is trying to say that without knowing what it is like to have full access to communication/language/social situations, the oral-deaf child doesnt know what it is like nor able to recognize how deprived they are in their edcuational settings. How do I know, I was one of them. I thought Deaf schools or ASL were for deaf people of lower intelligence levels and I felt that I didnt need it despite my constant struggles to keep up in the classrooms and social settings. Once I discovered ASL and the Deaf community, I realized how bad I had it by being oral-only. I always told people IRL if I knew what I know know back then, I would have demanded to have equal rights to everything as my hearing classmates did in the educational system. But because, missing out on everything or being left out constantly was the only thing I was familiar with, I thought this was the best I could get.

 

[jillio]

You're comparing an oral educational environment to child abuse???

And just because they have been in an educational setting does not mean they are marked for failure. You can't just pick up all the deaf children with cochlear implants and move them to deaf school just because you feel it "best facilitates their education." Your making deaf education into one size fits all. Your taking away educational opportunities for children. I disagree with that.

Here we go again. Of course I didn't compare oral education to child abuse. I was offering an example of a child not wanting to change a negative situation even when it is detrimental to them. Children cling to what is familiar, and what is familiar isn't always the same as what is best for them.

I'm not taking away anything. A bi-bi environment adds to their choices. Oral only removes them. A bi-bi environment doesn't have to be at a "deaf school". The philosophy can be brought into the public school programs just as easily. Any school that uses a self contained classroom, pull out schedules, or a TC program can be converted to a bi-bi program.

 

[Oceanbreeze]

What about the children with CI that are successful in mainstream education. Do we remove them from oral to introduce ASL? Should ASL be introduced as a support or what is your opinion. Or can oral education be encouraged if the child is being successful?

If a child is successful, then leave them alone. That seems like a no-brainer.

Obviously, children can and do thrive in an oral only environment, but exactly how many kids actually thrive; even with a CI? That's the question in my mind, and would I want to risk language development by going with an oral only approach without sign? I can answer and say no.

If I had a deaf child, I would investigate CI for that child, but I would also sign and I WOULD NOT drop it in favor of an oral only environment. That's just what I would do, but the question is ....which approach is better? Clearly, if I had to decide what placement is best for my child, I would choose bi-bi.

I think in determining what is best for a deaf child's educational needs, one must talk to people. Do research, but talk to people who've lived through experiences in the educational system and see what they say. You can talk to experts, but that will only give you one view. Too many times parents make decisions based on one view presented and I think that is where alot of things can get massively screwed up and the kids are clearly suffering for it.

 

[jillio]

If a child is successful, then leave them alone. That seems like a no-brainer.

Obviously, children can and do thrive in an oral only environment, but exactly how many kids actually thrive; even with a CI? That's the question in my mind, and would I want to risk language development by going with an oral only approach without sign? I can answer and say no.

If I had a deaf child, I would investigate CI for that child, but I would also sign and I WOULD NOT drop it in favor of an oral only environment. That's just what I would do, but the question is ....which approach is better? Clearly, if I had to decide what placement is best for my child, I would choose bi-bi.

I think in determining what is best for a deaf child's educational needs, one must talk to people. Do research, but talk to people who've lived through experiences in the educational system and see what they say. You can talk to experts, but that will only give you one view. Too many times parents make decisions based on one view presented and I think that is where alot of things can get massively screwed up and the kids are clearly suffering for it.

 

[jillio]

I think Jillo is trying to say that without knowing what it is like to have full access to communication/language/social situations, the oral-deaf child doesnt know what it is like nor able to recognize how deprived they are in their edcuational settings. How do I know, I was one of them. I thought Deaf schools or ASL were for deaf people of lower intelligence levels and I felt that I didnt need it despite my constant struggles to keep up in the classrooms and social settings. Once I discovered ASL and the Deaf community, I realized how bad I had it by being oral-only. I always told people IRL if I knew what I know know back then, I would have demanded to have equal rights to everything as my hearing classmates did in the educational system. But because, missing out on everything or being left out constantly was the only thing I was familiar with, I thought this was the best I could get.

Exactly! You don't know what you are missing until you are put in a position of having it.

 

[shel90]

If a child is successful, then leave them alone. That seems like a no-brainer.

Obviously, children can and do thrive in an oral only environment, but exactly how many kids actually thrive; even with a CI? That's the question in my mind, and would I want to risk language development by going with an oral only approach without sign? I can answer and say no.

If I had a deaf child, I would investigate CI for that child, but I would also sign and I WOULD NOT drop it in favor of an oral only environment. That's just what I would do, but the question is ....which approach is better? Clearly, if I had to decide what placement is best for my child, I would choose bi-bi.

I think in determining what is best for a deaf child's educational needs, one must talk to people. Do research, but talk to people who've lived through experiences in the educational system and see what they say. You can talk to experts, but that will only give you one view. Too many times parents make decisions based on one view presented and I think that is where alot of things can get massively screwed up and the kids are clearly suffering for it.

Right..

 

[jillio]

Right..

I think what several of us are trying to say is "Go ahead and choose a CI. That is a choice that only you can make. But do not allow the choice of a CI put you in the position of limiting the linguistic environment of the child based on the fact that they have a CI."

That's what it really comes down to.

 

[shel90]

I think what several of us are trying to say is "Go ahead and choose a CI. That is a choice that only you can make. But do not allow the choice of a CI put you in the position of limiting the linguistic environment of the child based on the fact that they have a CI."

That's what it really comes down to.

That's a pretty simple summary everything the bibi supporters are trying to say.

 

[jillio]

That's a pretty simple summary everything the bibi supporters are trying to say.

Just wanted to clarify again so someone wouldn't pop out with that "anti-CI" accusation.

 

[Oceanbreeze]

I think what several of us are trying to say is "Go ahead and choose a CI. That is a choice that only you can make. But do not allow the choice of a CI put you in the position of limiting the linguistic environment of the child based on the fact that they have a CI."

That's what it really comes down to.

That's what it comes down to for me. If I had a child born deaf, I would explore all options, but I would also ensure my child had access to language. To not do that, just makes it harder for the child.

 

[jillio]

That's what it comes down to for me. If I had a child born deaf, I would explore all options, but I would also ensure my child had access to language. To not do that, just makes it harder for the child.

**nodding** And its sad that a discussion that starts out as not denying ASL, suddenly turns into accusations of denying children CI. Nothing could be further from the truth.

 

[LadySekhmet]

Oh..I wanted to ask you. About those who are fluent in ASL but weak in English as you mentioned, we have to ask what happened during their early years regarding to language development and educational settings they were placed in. That is critical to find out why they are weak in English and then address where they were failed in the educational system. That is what I always look at..

Also, those who are poor at ASL..did they grow up without it? Were they language delayed? Many children who are language delayed without a strong first language usually have weak ASL skills if they learned at an older age due to the deficients in their processing/cognitive areas from not being able to develop language during their formative years.

To find the answer, we have to ask them about their background. We cant make assumptions without knowing.

Actually - I really don't know. The few that I can think of, they know ASL because their parents are deaf and everyone does ASL at home. Their parents also have okay English as well (not the best, but good enough). So, I really do not know where they have failed at Education. I know they learned at a lower English level than the rest of peers. This is why I came up with the conclusion that ASL is causing confusion with English because they're totally two different syntax. Now I realize that I am wrong, ASL is not at fault at all. The only thing I can think of is the teachers are not knowledgeable enough about ASL language to translate into written English (this is where Bi Bi approach would have worked well).

It's been a long time, so...

Poor ASL - Yes the few people that I know, yes has poor ASL skills because they only sign in school while at home they talk. Their parents don't know sign language. My mom is one of the few parents that does know sign. So, I see a lot of students cannot really sign in ASL, myself for one. Although I can understand ASL and sign in ASL "signs", but I cannot get rid of the English thoughts that's in my head. (See my next post about this....)

There is Early Childhood Intervention program at my school. The kids are taught both oral and sign. Simple signs and simple spoken language. It is during IEP meetings to see what will benefit the child the most. There are a few that cannot speak well (either due to poor listening skills, poor auditory skills, or just doesn't want to), and they will not be forced to take speech classes. Those who does speak well gets speech classes. It's NOT AVT, but similar...teaches how to lipread, how to say words properly such as spelling words or sentences, idioms, etc etc. I learned how to say ceiling. Stuff like that.

Nowadays, there's a huge influx of CI children and when I went to visit there last, many do NOT sign. They were jabbing to me and I had no clue what they said.

This is why I thought the school I went to has such a huge diverse of education between the students. Not all are successful. There are a lot of students who also have other disabilities on top of deafness.

 

[jillio]

Actually - I really don't know. The few that I can think of, they know ASL because their parents are deaf and everyone does ASL at home. Their parents also have okay English as well (not the best, but good enough). So, I really do not know where they have failed at Education. I know they learned at a lower English level than the rest of peers. This is why I came up with the conclusion that ASL is causing confusion with English because they're totally two different syntax. Now I realize that I am wrong, ASL is not at fault at all. The only thing I can think of is the teachers are not knowledgeable enough about ASL language to translate into written English (this is where Bi Bi approach would have worked well).

It's been a long time, so...

Poor ASL - Yes the few people that I know, yes has poor ASL skills because they only sign in school while at home they talk. Their parents don't know sign language. My mom is one of the few parents that does know sign. So, I see a lot of students cannot really sign in ASL, myself for one. Although I can understand ASL and sign in ASL "signs", but I cannot get rid of the English thoughts that's in my head. (See my next post about this....)

There is Early Childhood Intervention program at my school. The kids are taught both oral and sign. Simple signs and simple spoken language. It is during IEP meetings to see what will benefit the child the most. There are a few that cannot speak well (either due to poor listening skills, poor auditory skills, or just doesn't want to), and they will not be forced to take speech classes. Those who does speak well gets speech classes. It's NOT AVT, but similar...teaches how to lipread, how to say words properly such as spelling words or sentences, idioms, etc etc. I learned how to say ceiling. Stuff like that.

Nowadays, there's a huge influx of CI children and when I went to visit there last, many do NOT sign. They were jabbing to me and I had no clue what they said.

This is why I thought the school I went to has such a huge diverse of education between the students. Not all are successful. There are a lot of students who also have other disabilities on top of deafness.

That is a very diverse population.

 

[LadySekhmet]

That is a very diverse population.

Tell me about it. In a way, I should be lucky that I got the education that gave me the best of both worlds. The only thing I wished I had was more ASL skills and more Deaf Culture exposure. The school NOW is doing more Deaf Culture exposure. I'm not too sure about ASL skills though. There's a lot of current students that use FM systems and CI, so it's definitely very different then when I was going to school there.

That's why I'm not sure if the school strictly does one teaching methodology. I think they teach according what fits with the students' needs. Which is why one classroom may be broken down further into smaller groups according to how fast they learn/process information.

I don't even know if it's because of language deprivation. Some students do very well, others don't.

 

[Oceanbreeze]

**nodding** And its sad that a discussion that starts out as not denying ASL, suddenly turns into accusations of denying children CI. Nothing could be further from the truth.

I wouldn't deny my child a CI simply because the majority of my family is hearing. I can't deny that, but from the moment of diagnosis, I would use sign with my child. If that means, I learn ASL with my child, so be it. I'll do it.

Even in the best of circumstances, diagnosis of hearing loss doesn't always come immediately. It can take weeks or even months to get a definitive diagnosis. Those weeks and months are critical to language exposure. Also, I know it's popular to drop sign once the child begins to show profieciency in oral language. I would not drop sign. There would be times when wearing the CI isn't a good idea, so you would still need to communicate. Also, what about device failure? Processors malfunction and can take days to replace. What do you do? If the child knows sign, this wouldn't be a problem or it certainly would be less of a problem.

Lastly, regardless of CI, the child is still deaf. In my mind, it would be cruel to deny my child a visual language.

 

[jillio]

Tell me about it. In a way, I should be lucky that I got the education that gave me the best of both worlds. The only thing I wished I had was more ASL skills and more Deaf Culture exposure. The school NOW is doing more Deaf Culture exposure. I'm not too sure about ASL skills though. There's a lot of current students that use FM systems and CI, so it's definitely very different then when I was going to school there.

That's why I'm not sure if the school strictly does one teaching methodology. I think they teach according what fits with the students' needs. Which is why one classroom may be broken down further into smaller groups according to how fast they learn/process information.

I don't even know if it's because of language deprivation. Some students do very well, others don't.

It is good that they are at least making an effort to include the Deaf Culture in the kids' experience. That goes a long way in helping a child to develop a positive self image. High self efficacy leads to higher academic achievement.

 

[shel90]

Tell me about it. In a way, I should be lucky that I got the education that gave me the best of both worlds. The only thing I wished I had was more ASL skills and more Deaf Culture exposure. The school NOW is doing more Deaf Culture exposure. I'm not too sure about ASL skills though. There's a lot of current students that use FM systems and CI, so it's definitely very different then when I was going to school there.

That's why I'm not sure if the school strictly does one teaching methodology. I think they teach according what fits with the students' needs. Which is why one classroom may be broken down further into smaller groups according to how fast they learn/process information.

I don't even know if it's because of language deprivation. Some students do very well, others don't.

That's great about Deaf Culture exposure!