ASLuser101
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2003
- Messages
- 327
- Reaction score
- 0
The following is a rebuttal to comments Dr. Roz Rosen made. While I did not write the rebuttals (IN CAPS), I do agree with most of them. These rebuttals are for discussion purposes only. Readers are urged to do their OWN research into CIs and decide for themselves. Neither I or Roz Rosen can know what's best for your child!
[NOTES ARE IN CAPITALIZED LETTERS IN BRACKETS, BELOW]
=================================
CI Jan 01 | Newborn Hearing Systems Conference
http://www.nad.org/infocenter/infotogo/dcc/CIjan01/newborn.html
[NOTE THAT THESE COMMENTS, FROM JANUARY 2001, ARE STILL THE POSITION OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF THE DEAF, EVEN THOUGH THEY DO NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE NEWEST RESEARCH AND UPGRADES IN COCHLEAR IMPLANT TECHNOLOGY.THIS POSITION IS BASED ON VERY OLD INFORMATION]
Newborn Hearing Systems Conference
by Roz Rosen
About the author: Roz Rosen, (roz.rosen@gallaudet.edu) is one of the
strongest supporters of Deaf Culture, since she derives her own
extensive income and her "prestige" from the Deaf Culture movement. She
is a driving force behind all three of the major Deaf Culture advocacy
groups: Board Member of the World Federation of the Deaf (WFD),
Professor at Gallaudet University, and Executive Director of the Council
on Education of the Deaf (CED).
ARTICLE
Milan, Italy, was the venue for the Newborn Hearing Systems 2000
Conference, October 2000. The theme was early identification and
intervention for infants who may have hearing losses.
[THIS CONFERENCE WAS HELD SO THAT YOUNG INFANTS WITH PROFOUND HEARING LOSS WOULD BE DISCOVERED EARLY ENOUGH IN LIFE TO RECEIVE COCHLEAR IMPLANTS SO THEY WOULD NOT SUFFER THE DETRIMENTS OF ISOLATION, EXCLUSION, SEGREGATION AND MISUNDERSTANDING, AND SO THEY COULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO LEARN TO SPEAK CLEARLY AND LISTEN TO OTHER PEOPLE SPEAKING]
Deaf people and hearing professionals often have different perspectives
on early identification and intervention goals and purposes.
[THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS THAT "DEAF PEOPLE" LIKE ROZ ROSEN, ARE STILL DEAF, AND THEREFORE HAVE NO EXPERIENCE OR "PERSPECTIVE" ON WHAT IT IS LIKE TO HEAR EVERYTHING]
Many people think that the cochlear implant (CI) is, in itself, "early
intervention" and will solve all problems.
CIs are but a tool, which must be accompanied by all the other tools
available to deaf children, to complete their education and development.
[THE CI IS A DURABLE MEDICAL DEVICE THAT PERMITS PROFOUNDLY DEAF INDIVIDUALS TO HEAR ALL SOUNDS. THEREAFTER, THESE CHILDREN "COMPLETE THEIR EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT" IN THE SAME WAY AS EVERYONE ELSE. THIS THREATENS THE FUNDING FOR THE DEAF CULTURE ORGANIZATIONS AND INSTITUTIONS, FOR WHICH DR. ROZEN IS A PRIMARY AND SELF-INTERESTED ADVOCATE]
Milan, Again
When I was invited to keynote at this conference, I thought, Milan, here
we go again!
Milan was the site of the infamous International Conference on Education
of the Deaf in 1880, which gave birth to the edict that sign language be
verboten in educating deaf youth and to the dark age that ensued for the
international deaf community. But then I thought, perhaps this
conference might reverse that for the new millennium.
[ONCE AGAIN, DEAF CULTURE UTILIZES "TWISTED HISTORY." THE 1880
CONFERENCE IN MILAN ORDERED THE "DEAF CULTURE" INSTITUTIONS TO TEACH DEAF CHILDREN IN EITHER PURELY AURAL/ORAL METHODS, OR IF THE CHILDREN DID NOT "GET" THAT METHOD, THEN TO TEACH THE DEAF CHILDREN IN A COMBINED METHOD OF AURAL/ORAL TRAINING (VIBROTACTILE AND LIPREADING) PLUS SIGN-ASSISTED LIPREAD PHONETIC LANGUAGE. THOSE DEAF CHILDREN ALL BECAME
QUITE LITERATE IN PHONETIC LANGUAGE. THE ONLY THING THAT THE 1880 MILAN CONFERENCE BANNED WAS THE USE OF "NATIVE SIGNING" (I.E. "STREET SIGNING OF THE ILLITERATE AND UNEDUCATED DEAF" -- THE ONE WITH NO WRITTEN OR SPOKEN FORM) IN ACADEMIC CLASSROOMS]
There were about 450 participants in this conference from 53 countries.
Only five of those were deaf, including Dr. Jay Innes, Director of the
NAD Educational Policy and Program Development Center, who presented on
the NAD position paper on pediatric implants (the WFD is currently
working on one) [THE NAD AND WFD "WORKING GROUPS" ARE COMPRISED OF PEOPLE WHO ARE STILL DEAF AND HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IS EXPERIENCED BY PEOPLE WITH COCHLEAR IMPLANTS];
Ms. Beth Sonnenstrahl Benedict, a member of the delegation from the
Gallaudet University departments of education and audiology [SHE IS
STILL DEAF, HAS NO EXPERIENCE WITH COCHLEAR IMPLANTS OR WITH FULL HEARING ABILITY, AND WHY IS SHE "REPRESENTING" THE DEPARTMENT OF AUDIOLOGY?];
Ms. Helga Stevens, Executive Director of the European Union of the Deaf;
[SHE IS FULLY PHONETIC LANGUAGE FLUENT, HAVING GRADUATED WITH A JD IN LAW FROM BOALT HALL AT UC BERKELEY. SHE HAS NO EXPERIENCE WITH COCHLEAR IMPLANTS, IN FACT SHE CALLED PEOPLE WITH COCHLEAR IMPLANTS "ALIENS" IN A VIDEOTAPE TAKEN OF HER AT THE WFD CONFERENCE IN MONTREAL IN JULY, 2003;
AND SHE ALSO STATED FROM THE STAGE AT THAT CONFERENCE THAT THE POSITION OF THE WFD IS THAT EVERYONE MUST "FIGHT" COCHLEAR IMPLANTS]
Ms. Elizabeth Rodriguez, Executive Director of the Puerto Rico
Association of the Deaf; [NO ACTUAL EXPERIENCE WITH HEARING, OR WITH COCHLEAR IMPLANTS. THIS ASSOCIATION IS DIRECTLY RELATED TO WFD, AND FOLLOWS THE GALLAUDET AND NAD POSITIONS IN THE USA]
and myself. [ROZ ROSEN (SEE ABOVE)]
We were delighted that Ms. Barbara Raimondo also presented. [NO
INFORMATION ON THIS PERSON IS GIVEN, BUT APPARENTLY SHE IS NOT DEAF]
Ms. Krista Walker was invited as an interpreter, along with two others
from the United States. [NOTE THAT THREE INTERPRETERS WERE INVOLVED. THEY ARE DRIVING AND BEHIND THIS DEAF CULTURE MOVEMENT, BECAUSE IF ALL DEAF PEOPLE BECOME INDEPENDENT WITH COCHLEAR IMPLANTS, THEN THE INTERPRETERS WILL BE UNABLE TO ASSERT TO PEOPLE THAT THEY ARE "EXPERTS"
ON DEAF INDIVIDUALS, SINCE ALL OF THE PRELINGUALLY DEAF AND
EARLY-DEAFENED PEOPLE WILL BE ABLE TO SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES (AND ALSO WILL NOT NEED INTERPRETERS)]
Topics at this conference included identification, intervention,
infrastructures supporting infant hearing programs, language
development, genetic and medical research, hearing aids and cochlear
implants.
Diversity and Partnerships
My keynote was entitled "Perspectives of the Deaf Community: A Case for Diversity and Partnerships." The three basic themes of my presentation, as related to deaf people, were:
human rights and diversity;
[DEAF INDIVIDUALS ARE EQUAL HUMAN BEINGS WITH NORMAL HUMAN BRAINS AND DAMAGE TO THEIR MICROSCOPIC COCHLEAR HAIR CELLS -- A SITUATION WHICH CAN NOW BE SUBSTANTIALLY REMEDIATED BY A COCHLEAR IMPLANT. AS A DISABILITY MATTER THERE IS NO ISSUE OF "DIVERSITY"]
newborn hearing loss identification and intervention;
[THEY ONLY SUPPORT NEWBORN HEARING LOSS SCREENING SO THEY CAN GET ACCESS TO THAT INFORMATION AND PROPAGANDIZE THE PARENTS NOT TO GIVE THE DEAF CHILDREN A COCHLEAR IMPLANT]
considerations and challenges for the future.
[THEY ARE DESPERATELY WORRIED ABOUT LOSING THEIR FUNDING, WHICH WILL HAPPEN IF THE HEARING LOSS OF DEAF INDIVIDUALS IS REMEDIATED, ESPECIALLY IN INFANCY]
I quoted international conventions supported by the United Nations and
the World Federation of the Deaf (WFD) related to the rights of children
and the rights of people with disabilities.
[THE UNITED NATIONS DOES NOT "SUPPORT" ANY SUCH THING. THE WFD LOBBIES THE U.N. CONTINUOUSLY]
The deaf child's bill of rights [WHICH HAS NEVER BEEN RATIFIED OR
ACCEPTED BY ANYONE, OTHER THAN THE WFD] includes:
identity as a visual being;
[ADVOCATING THAT ALL DEAF PEOPLE "IDENTIFY" THEMSELVES SOLELY WITH THEIR PHYSICAL DISABILITY, SO THEY WON'T GET COCHLEAR IMPLANTS]
language and bilingualism;
[USING INAPPLICABLE ARGUMENTS BASED ON ANALYSES AND RECOMMENDATIOND FOR PHONETIC NATURAL LANGUAGES, AND "TWISTING" THOSE ARGUMENTS, WITHOUT ANY
PROOF WHATSOEVER, TO MAKE THEM "APPLY" TO NONPHONETIC FORMS OF COMMUNICATION]
and membership in the deaf community as well as that of the family.
[PAYING DUES TO, SUPPORTING, AND ADVOCATING FOR THE CONTINUING FUNDING OF ORGANIZATIONS AND INSTITUTIONS THAT ARE NOW COMPLETELY OUT OF DATE]
In preparation for this speech, I conducted an electronic survey,
emailed to 150 key leaders and educators in the United States and other
countries.
[150 IS NOT A REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE. THE SURVEY WAS SENT TO ONLY THEIR OWN SUPPORTERS. THE SURVEY WAS ALSO SENT TO PEOPLE WHO HAVE NO EXPERIENCE WITH HEARING EVERYTHING OR TO THOSE WITH COCHLEAR IMPLANTS]
There were 96 responses from 11 countries, many with written comments.
[MEANING THAT, ON AVERAGE, THEY ONLY GOT 8 OR 9 RESPONSES FROM EVERY COUNTRY, AND THOSE WERE FROM THEIR OWN SUPPORTERS]
The top concerns as perceived by the deaf community were:
[THIS SURVEY DEFINITELY DOES NOT INDICATE RESPONSES FROM THE "DEAF COMMUNITY" ANYWHERE]
that the primary focus of early identification would be on the ear
rather than on the child;
[HEARING LOSS OCCURS IN THE EAR, DOESN'T IT? THE PRIMARY FOCUS IS TO ENABLE A DEAF CHILD TO FUNCTION AUDITORILY AS FULLY AS POSSIBLE, BEGINNING AS EARLY IN LIFE AS POSSIBLE, SO THE CHILD CAN GROW UP WITHOUT ISOLATION, SEGREGATION AND DEPRESSION. THAT IS DEFINITELY A FOCUS ON THE CHILD AND ON THE CHILD'S ENTIRE FUTURE]
that hearing loss would be treated as a medical rather than a human
issue;
[SINCE WHEN IS HEARING LOSS "NOT A MEDICAL ISSUE"?]
that there was insufficient knowledge about deaf people among the
medical and intervention communities;
[THIS IS SOLELY DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE DEAF CULTURE ORGANIZATIONS ARE DELIBERATELY SUPPRESSING AND TWISTING INFORMATION ABOUT COCHLEAR IMPLANTS, AND, IN FACT, DELIBERATELY FRIGHTENING PEOPLE AWAY FROM
COCHLEAR IMPLANTS]
end of pt 1
[NOTES ARE IN CAPITALIZED LETTERS IN BRACKETS, BELOW]
=================================
CI Jan 01 | Newborn Hearing Systems Conference
http://www.nad.org/infocenter/infotogo/dcc/CIjan01/newborn.html
[NOTE THAT THESE COMMENTS, FROM JANUARY 2001, ARE STILL THE POSITION OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF THE DEAF, EVEN THOUGH THEY DO NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE NEWEST RESEARCH AND UPGRADES IN COCHLEAR IMPLANT TECHNOLOGY.THIS POSITION IS BASED ON VERY OLD INFORMATION]
Newborn Hearing Systems Conference
by Roz Rosen
About the author: Roz Rosen, (roz.rosen@gallaudet.edu) is one of the
strongest supporters of Deaf Culture, since she derives her own
extensive income and her "prestige" from the Deaf Culture movement. She
is a driving force behind all three of the major Deaf Culture advocacy
groups: Board Member of the World Federation of the Deaf (WFD),
Professor at Gallaudet University, and Executive Director of the Council
on Education of the Deaf (CED).
ARTICLE
Milan, Italy, was the venue for the Newborn Hearing Systems 2000
Conference, October 2000. The theme was early identification and
intervention for infants who may have hearing losses.
[THIS CONFERENCE WAS HELD SO THAT YOUNG INFANTS WITH PROFOUND HEARING LOSS WOULD BE DISCOVERED EARLY ENOUGH IN LIFE TO RECEIVE COCHLEAR IMPLANTS SO THEY WOULD NOT SUFFER THE DETRIMENTS OF ISOLATION, EXCLUSION, SEGREGATION AND MISUNDERSTANDING, AND SO THEY COULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO LEARN TO SPEAK CLEARLY AND LISTEN TO OTHER PEOPLE SPEAKING]
Deaf people and hearing professionals often have different perspectives
on early identification and intervention goals and purposes.
[THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS THAT "DEAF PEOPLE" LIKE ROZ ROSEN, ARE STILL DEAF, AND THEREFORE HAVE NO EXPERIENCE OR "PERSPECTIVE" ON WHAT IT IS LIKE TO HEAR EVERYTHING]
Many people think that the cochlear implant (CI) is, in itself, "early
intervention" and will solve all problems.
CIs are but a tool, which must be accompanied by all the other tools
available to deaf children, to complete their education and development.
[THE CI IS A DURABLE MEDICAL DEVICE THAT PERMITS PROFOUNDLY DEAF INDIVIDUALS TO HEAR ALL SOUNDS. THEREAFTER, THESE CHILDREN "COMPLETE THEIR EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT" IN THE SAME WAY AS EVERYONE ELSE. THIS THREATENS THE FUNDING FOR THE DEAF CULTURE ORGANIZATIONS AND INSTITUTIONS, FOR WHICH DR. ROZEN IS A PRIMARY AND SELF-INTERESTED ADVOCATE]
Milan, Again
When I was invited to keynote at this conference, I thought, Milan, here
we go again!
Milan was the site of the infamous International Conference on Education
of the Deaf in 1880, which gave birth to the edict that sign language be
verboten in educating deaf youth and to the dark age that ensued for the
international deaf community. But then I thought, perhaps this
conference might reverse that for the new millennium.
[ONCE AGAIN, DEAF CULTURE UTILIZES "TWISTED HISTORY." THE 1880
CONFERENCE IN MILAN ORDERED THE "DEAF CULTURE" INSTITUTIONS TO TEACH DEAF CHILDREN IN EITHER PURELY AURAL/ORAL METHODS, OR IF THE CHILDREN DID NOT "GET" THAT METHOD, THEN TO TEACH THE DEAF CHILDREN IN A COMBINED METHOD OF AURAL/ORAL TRAINING (VIBROTACTILE AND LIPREADING) PLUS SIGN-ASSISTED LIPREAD PHONETIC LANGUAGE. THOSE DEAF CHILDREN ALL BECAME
QUITE LITERATE IN PHONETIC LANGUAGE. THE ONLY THING THAT THE 1880 MILAN CONFERENCE BANNED WAS THE USE OF "NATIVE SIGNING" (I.E. "STREET SIGNING OF THE ILLITERATE AND UNEDUCATED DEAF" -- THE ONE WITH NO WRITTEN OR SPOKEN FORM) IN ACADEMIC CLASSROOMS]
There were about 450 participants in this conference from 53 countries.
Only five of those were deaf, including Dr. Jay Innes, Director of the
NAD Educational Policy and Program Development Center, who presented on
the NAD position paper on pediatric implants (the WFD is currently
working on one) [THE NAD AND WFD "WORKING GROUPS" ARE COMPRISED OF PEOPLE WHO ARE STILL DEAF AND HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IS EXPERIENCED BY PEOPLE WITH COCHLEAR IMPLANTS];
Ms. Beth Sonnenstrahl Benedict, a member of the delegation from the
Gallaudet University departments of education and audiology [SHE IS
STILL DEAF, HAS NO EXPERIENCE WITH COCHLEAR IMPLANTS OR WITH FULL HEARING ABILITY, AND WHY IS SHE "REPRESENTING" THE DEPARTMENT OF AUDIOLOGY?];
Ms. Helga Stevens, Executive Director of the European Union of the Deaf;
[SHE IS FULLY PHONETIC LANGUAGE FLUENT, HAVING GRADUATED WITH A JD IN LAW FROM BOALT HALL AT UC BERKELEY. SHE HAS NO EXPERIENCE WITH COCHLEAR IMPLANTS, IN FACT SHE CALLED PEOPLE WITH COCHLEAR IMPLANTS "ALIENS" IN A VIDEOTAPE TAKEN OF HER AT THE WFD CONFERENCE IN MONTREAL IN JULY, 2003;
AND SHE ALSO STATED FROM THE STAGE AT THAT CONFERENCE THAT THE POSITION OF THE WFD IS THAT EVERYONE MUST "FIGHT" COCHLEAR IMPLANTS]
Ms. Elizabeth Rodriguez, Executive Director of the Puerto Rico
Association of the Deaf; [NO ACTUAL EXPERIENCE WITH HEARING, OR WITH COCHLEAR IMPLANTS. THIS ASSOCIATION IS DIRECTLY RELATED TO WFD, AND FOLLOWS THE GALLAUDET AND NAD POSITIONS IN THE USA]
and myself. [ROZ ROSEN (SEE ABOVE)]
We were delighted that Ms. Barbara Raimondo also presented. [NO
INFORMATION ON THIS PERSON IS GIVEN, BUT APPARENTLY SHE IS NOT DEAF]
Ms. Krista Walker was invited as an interpreter, along with two others
from the United States. [NOTE THAT THREE INTERPRETERS WERE INVOLVED. THEY ARE DRIVING AND BEHIND THIS DEAF CULTURE MOVEMENT, BECAUSE IF ALL DEAF PEOPLE BECOME INDEPENDENT WITH COCHLEAR IMPLANTS, THEN THE INTERPRETERS WILL BE UNABLE TO ASSERT TO PEOPLE THAT THEY ARE "EXPERTS"
ON DEAF INDIVIDUALS, SINCE ALL OF THE PRELINGUALLY DEAF AND
EARLY-DEAFENED PEOPLE WILL BE ABLE TO SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES (AND ALSO WILL NOT NEED INTERPRETERS)]
Topics at this conference included identification, intervention,
infrastructures supporting infant hearing programs, language
development, genetic and medical research, hearing aids and cochlear
implants.
Diversity and Partnerships
My keynote was entitled "Perspectives of the Deaf Community: A Case for Diversity and Partnerships." The three basic themes of my presentation, as related to deaf people, were:
human rights and diversity;
[DEAF INDIVIDUALS ARE EQUAL HUMAN BEINGS WITH NORMAL HUMAN BRAINS AND DAMAGE TO THEIR MICROSCOPIC COCHLEAR HAIR CELLS -- A SITUATION WHICH CAN NOW BE SUBSTANTIALLY REMEDIATED BY A COCHLEAR IMPLANT. AS A DISABILITY MATTER THERE IS NO ISSUE OF "DIVERSITY"]
newborn hearing loss identification and intervention;
[THEY ONLY SUPPORT NEWBORN HEARING LOSS SCREENING SO THEY CAN GET ACCESS TO THAT INFORMATION AND PROPAGANDIZE THE PARENTS NOT TO GIVE THE DEAF CHILDREN A COCHLEAR IMPLANT]
considerations and challenges for the future.
[THEY ARE DESPERATELY WORRIED ABOUT LOSING THEIR FUNDING, WHICH WILL HAPPEN IF THE HEARING LOSS OF DEAF INDIVIDUALS IS REMEDIATED, ESPECIALLY IN INFANCY]
I quoted international conventions supported by the United Nations and
the World Federation of the Deaf (WFD) related to the rights of children
and the rights of people with disabilities.
[THE UNITED NATIONS DOES NOT "SUPPORT" ANY SUCH THING. THE WFD LOBBIES THE U.N. CONTINUOUSLY]
The deaf child's bill of rights [WHICH HAS NEVER BEEN RATIFIED OR
ACCEPTED BY ANYONE, OTHER THAN THE WFD] includes:
identity as a visual being;
[ADVOCATING THAT ALL DEAF PEOPLE "IDENTIFY" THEMSELVES SOLELY WITH THEIR PHYSICAL DISABILITY, SO THEY WON'T GET COCHLEAR IMPLANTS]
language and bilingualism;
[USING INAPPLICABLE ARGUMENTS BASED ON ANALYSES AND RECOMMENDATIOND FOR PHONETIC NATURAL LANGUAGES, AND "TWISTING" THOSE ARGUMENTS, WITHOUT ANY
PROOF WHATSOEVER, TO MAKE THEM "APPLY" TO NONPHONETIC FORMS OF COMMUNICATION]
and membership in the deaf community as well as that of the family.
[PAYING DUES TO, SUPPORTING, AND ADVOCATING FOR THE CONTINUING FUNDING OF ORGANIZATIONS AND INSTITUTIONS THAT ARE NOW COMPLETELY OUT OF DATE]
In preparation for this speech, I conducted an electronic survey,
emailed to 150 key leaders and educators in the United States and other
countries.
[150 IS NOT A REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE. THE SURVEY WAS SENT TO ONLY THEIR OWN SUPPORTERS. THE SURVEY WAS ALSO SENT TO PEOPLE WHO HAVE NO EXPERIENCE WITH HEARING EVERYTHING OR TO THOSE WITH COCHLEAR IMPLANTS]
There were 96 responses from 11 countries, many with written comments.
[MEANING THAT, ON AVERAGE, THEY ONLY GOT 8 OR 9 RESPONSES FROM EVERY COUNTRY, AND THOSE WERE FROM THEIR OWN SUPPORTERS]
The top concerns as perceived by the deaf community were:
[THIS SURVEY DEFINITELY DOES NOT INDICATE RESPONSES FROM THE "DEAF COMMUNITY" ANYWHERE]
that the primary focus of early identification would be on the ear
rather than on the child;
[HEARING LOSS OCCURS IN THE EAR, DOESN'T IT? THE PRIMARY FOCUS IS TO ENABLE A DEAF CHILD TO FUNCTION AUDITORILY AS FULLY AS POSSIBLE, BEGINNING AS EARLY IN LIFE AS POSSIBLE, SO THE CHILD CAN GROW UP WITHOUT ISOLATION, SEGREGATION AND DEPRESSION. THAT IS DEFINITELY A FOCUS ON THE CHILD AND ON THE CHILD'S ENTIRE FUTURE]
that hearing loss would be treated as a medical rather than a human
issue;
[SINCE WHEN IS HEARING LOSS "NOT A MEDICAL ISSUE"?]
that there was insufficient knowledge about deaf people among the
medical and intervention communities;
[THIS IS SOLELY DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE DEAF CULTURE ORGANIZATIONS ARE DELIBERATELY SUPPRESSING AND TWISTING INFORMATION ABOUT COCHLEAR IMPLANTS, AND, IN FACT, DELIBERATELY FRIGHTENING PEOPLE AWAY FROM
COCHLEAR IMPLANTS]
end of pt 1