Ear implant success sparks culture war - New Scientist
On the impact of CIs on Deaf culture.
One thing this article conveys, and which is very important - more so than the CI vs Deaf Culture debate - is the need to implant early.. very early, before age of one, to maximise chances of success.
Could the end of sign language for deaf children be in sight? A spate of new studies has shown that profoundly deaf babies who receive cochlear implants in their first year of life develop language and speech skills remarkably close to those of hearing children. Many of the children even learn to sing passably well and function almost flawlessly in the hearing world.
The argument about deaf culture resistance is now becoming bit old. More deaf adults have been experimenting with this technology already and there are deaf families who have their own deaf children implanted. It is a trend.
Truthfully the way how I see in this article and MANY other promotions, they DO not mention that there will be a quite number of deaf children who will not be qualified for implantation because of their different anatomy of deafness. Consideration of children who get some or little benefit from anything remain pathetically lame. There is too interest much in sparking excitment that is actually what sparks deaf people’s angry and especially those who suck later on.
Anne Marie
Comment by Anne Marie — November 28, 2006 @ 12:45 am
I agree with Anne Marie’s comment. I get tired of saying this today already… I’m actually sick of saying I’m a CI user. I never even thought about it until I see “cochlear implant” everywhere. *sigh*
Anyway…
Not every deaf child is going to be implanted. Nor will ALL of them be successful with their CI usage, for various reasons.
So sign language will NEVER die.
Also, not EVERY parent will automatically consider cochlear implant for their child; though, it seems a majority do.
I strongly believe that we need to research MORE on ASL and English as bilingual, rather than focusing too much CI and functioning as “hearing” in the “hearing” world. They’ve spent way a lot of money on that research.
Where’s the research on ASL? No, I’m not talking about hearing doctors who look at the wrong places to make their own justifications, but in the Deaf Community.
We all already know, but we need to have more people with PhD writing research on it with more statistics and that it WOULD increase if we replace SEE/PSE with ASL in schools.
Comment by IamMine — November 28, 2006 @ 2:56 am
Three major cochlear implant manufacturers: Advanced Bionics, Cochlear Corp. and MED-EL. They have significant financial and scientific clouts to ensure children of certain hearing losses get CIs by lobbying medical practitioners and certified audiologists relentlessly, so to encourage them to offer CI options to parents of deaf/hoh children at the earliest age.
Comment by P.I. — November 28, 2006 @ 7:30 am
Hi all, I am not surprised that the majority of research and resarch funds is on CIs, and how CIs have enabled deaf kids to function as their hearing peers do in the hearing world. Or so these CI-funded studies say.
I don’t dispute that some, or even many, CI implantees - whether kids implanted early enough and getting sufficient therapy/follow-up or late-deafened folks - have been successful.
However, as you all mentioned, yes, there are failures. And these tended to be hushed up. In the school for the deaf where I teach, I have seen for myself kids with CIs who still cannot cope in mainstream schools and even oral deaf schools. (My school uses the TC mode of communication.)
And yup, CIs are not suitable for every deaf kid or adult too - due to various reasons.
In short, CIs in its present form and cost is not a miracle ‘cure’ or solution. The problem starts when CI companies or anti-Deaf / anti-sign folks try to make it seem otherwise.
Comment by Dictatorial Editor — November 28, 2006 @ 9:47 am