Jack.O'keeffe@f26.n129.z1.fidonet.org (Jack O'keeffe) (04/04/91)
Index Number: 14623
[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]
Hi Annie: I NetMailed a copy of the NAD position paper on Cochlear
Implants to you and hope you got it. It was too absurd to post in
the echo. I suppose there always will be those who elect to choose
ignorance above knowledge - as some of the "Genetic Engineering"
opponents and now the NAD appear to do. You and I, being deaf but
not Deaf, may never fully understand everything about the Deaf
community. But have you noticed one curious thing? All of these
passionate pleas to perpetuate deafness seem to be eminating from
sources dependent on the continuence of deafness for the continuence
of their current employment. If deafness was wiped out, they'd have
to look for work. Hmmm ... sure makes it easier to understand
their point of view :-)
... Carpe Diem!
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!129!26!Jack.O'keeffe
Internet: Jack.O'keeffe@f26.n129.z1.fidonet.orgJack.O'keeffe@f26.n129.z1.fidonet.org (Jack O'keeffe) (04/05/91)
Index Number: 14632
[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]
JC> Why is the NAD position on cochlear implants for children,
JC> absurd?
It seems to be a very self-serving position paper, Jay, well
written - but not well reasoned.
While I recognize that everyone who is deaf will not agree,
many would prefer to hear if possible. I believe that in a
free society, children and their parents should have access
to all responsible means they believe will improve their
quality of life. Why should NAD deny them that option?
Where NAD's paper really gets absurd IMHO, is at the bottom of
page 4 on my fax copy. There they say:
"We should not aim to make children who would otherwise be Black
adults into white ones, children who would otherwise be women
into men, or children who would otherwise be members of the
deaf community into members of the hearing community . . "
Equating cochlear implants to race-changing or gender-changing
is quite absurd! And that statement seems to generalize NAD's
premise to one of opposing, not only cochlear implants, but also
anything else that might make it possible for deaf children to
hear. How can one get much more absurd than that?
Not every deaf child is a candidate for a cochlear implant. And
no one is FORCING anyone to get implants for their deaf children.
But NAD's position would deny that freedom of choice.
Not to worry, more rational views will prevail.
... Pax vobiscum.
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!129!26!Jack.O'keeffe
Internet: Jack.O'keeffe@f26.n129.z1.fidonet.orgIJJT500@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU (Mike Wheeler) (04/10/91)
Index Number: 14652
Jack O'kieffe,
You may be right in saying that you will never understand the Deaf
community. But your remark about pepetuating deafnes and employment is
nothing but a ignorant, narrow-minded snipe.
I am a student at IUPUI (a "normal" university) in coputer science
I sign, I am Deaf and I am a member of the Deaf community. If you read
any of my post you would see why mainstreaming for most deaf persons doesn't
work as it is really done. If only they could do it like the describe in the
research papers and text books then it would probably work. But the lack
of trained people and funds along with the growing class sizes make it
impossible for most schools to do it propperly.
As far as Signing goes you can sign and lead a normal and happy life.
ASL is a natural vital and essential language and all the mud slinging that
any one can do will not stop it.
From 1880 to about 1955 the mid 1950's to 1960 (somewhere in there)
educators tried to eliminate all sign altogether and ASL survived and
will be here for a long time. I have seen to many kids sent to our local
school for the deaf at age seven with no language skills after oral programs
finally discarded them as hopeless only to see them become fluent in ASL.
Sorry about being so emotional in this post but I have to call a spade a
spade. Next time I pull one of the pieces of research I collect as a hobby to
back it up. I have 1,241,322 pages of various research papers, articles and
studies supporting the use of ASL and residential schools. Needless to say
it fills a room. And yet there are still people and organizations trying to
knock it down. (If you want to knock it down join the Alexander
Ghaham Bell Soiciety and subscribe to the Volta Review)ljr@brownvm.brown.edu (Loretta Reiss) (04/10/91)
Index Number: 14657 I am very interested in cochlear implants. I know there are some adult users in this newsgroup and I enjoy reading their posts. However, I think the NAD position paper made some valid points. When I went to a lecture by a man from the implant team in NYC last year, he told us that the number of "non-users" (children who were implanted, but do not use the device after a few months) is high. Also, the average user functions like a severely H.I. individual. This is not surprising when you consider the small number of electrodes and what synthetic speech sounds like with that number of channels. The "superstar" users are generally people who had good oral skills beforehand. There are complications sometimes and a significant number of the "superstar" users had to have repeated surgery because parts of the implant failed. I hope some day they will be able to make the electrodes smaller and solve some of the other problems, but on the average, all you can expect from this now is that your child will function like a severely H.I. person rather than a profoundly H.I. one with the CI. You can get the same results with the tactile aids. So, if it were my choice, I would get my child one of those and let him/her wait for the CI with 88 channels and dolby stereo (smile). Some of the kids who have these implants now may not be candidates for a better one in the future because of electro-chemical damage from the present ones. If the tactile aids work as well, why aren't more places pushing them? I think it is because it is easier to do research on them without forcing someone to buy them. --Loretta Reiss (ljr@brownvm.brown.edu or spr@cs.brown.edu)
Ann.Stalnaker@p0.f14.n385.z1.fidonet.org (Ann Stalnaker) (04/11/91)
Index Number: 14737 [This is from the Silent Talk Conference] > Why is the NAD position on cochlear implants for children, > absurd? > > Please note that the paper only addresses implants in > children, not in adults. I think the reason the NAD addresses the implants towards children as they know adults would be harder to convince or change their minds. I think NAD's reasoning is absurd - and is not rational at all. -- Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!385!14.0!Ann.Stalnaker Internet: Ann.Stalnaker@p0.f14.n385.z1.fidonet.org
Jay.Croft@p0.f147.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Jay Croft) (04/11/91)
Index Number: 14738
[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]
Putting a hearing aid, or a cochlear implant, onto a deaf person does
not make a hearing person. The person is still deaf.
I wore a hearing aid for 25 years. Then I got an infection in my ear;
my doctor advised me to leave it off for a few days so the ear would not
be a little greenhouse.
I found that I could function just fine without it, so I never put it
back on. I've no beef against anyone who can benefit from hearing aids
or implants--but let's not fool ourselves that the person no longer is
deaf.
The NAD paper seems to bring out this point.
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!109!147.0!Jay.Croft
Internet: Jay.Croft@p0.f147.n109.z1.fidonet.orgJack.O'keeffe@f26.n129.z1.fidonet.org (Jack O'keeffe) (04/11/91)
Index Number: 14747
[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]
JC> Putting a hearing aid, or a cochlear implant, onto a deaf
JC> person does not make a hearing person.
I don't know anyone who would seriously contend that it did, Jay.
But if that is supposed to be an argument against aids and implants,
it surely misses the mark. I use hearing aids because they help me,
not because I'm pretending to be hearing, or think it's fun to stuff
hardware in my ear. Ann doesn't use 'em - because they don't help
her. Frank uses 'em, so does Stu, so does Vixen. The point is, it's
different strokes for different folks. It's irrational to consider
people wrong, just because something that works for them does not
work for everyone.
I am truly bewildered by those proponents who see only one model for
deafness, who contend that ALL children should be taught in ASL - or
that ALL should be Mainstreamed. Or that NO child should have the
option of a cochlear implant. Anyone contending that must think all
deaf people are mindless clones of themselves. How arrogant! How
self-serving can one be ??
... Pax vobiscum.
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!129!26!Jack.O'keeffe
Internet: Jack.O'keeffe@f26.n129.z1.fidonet.orgStu.Turk@f26.n129.z1.fidonet.org (Stu Turk) (04/24/91)
Index Number: 15102
[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]
Mike Wheeler of 1:141/420 wrote to All:
MW> From: IJJT500@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU (Mike Wheeler)
MW> I sign, I am Deaf and I am a member of the Deaf community. If
MW> you read
MW> any of my post you would see why mainstreaming for most deaf
MW> persons doesn't
MW> work as it is really done. If only they could do it like the
MW> describe in the
Yes, Mike, "mainstreaming" often does not work out for many people. But I
would think that it should at least be tried for each deaf or hard of hearing
person first. When mainstreaming doesn't work the deaf person can always go to
deaf only classes. But they should first be given a chance to see what the
other side is like. And mainstreaming did work out ok for me (I was hard of
hearing at the time but am just about deaf now.)
It looks like the "mainstreaming" topic is going to be a perminate on-going
discussion here and I think we should carry it on without getting into
borderline personal attacks over it... :-)
Stu Turk, SilentTalk co-moderator
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!129!26!Stu.Turk
Internet: Stu.Turk@f26.n129.z1.fidonet.orgJack.O'keeffe@f26.n129.z1.fidonet.org (Jack O'keeffe) (04/24/91)
Index Number: 15103
[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]
Thanks for the kind words, Mike. I appreciate your endorsement.
MW> I have 1,241,322 pages of various research papers, articl
MW> studies supporting the use of ASL and residential schools.
That's wonderful, but PLEASE don't post ALL of them in this echo.
Maybe put them on a laser disk or something. :-)
Thank you for your support.
... Pax vobiscum.
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!129!26!Jack.O'keeffe
Internet: Jack.O'keeffe@f26.n129.z1.fidonet.orgAnn.Stalnaker@p0.f14.n385.z1.fidonet.org (Ann Stalnaker) (05/03/91)
Index Number: 15332
[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]
I'm going to jump on you with this, Mike - Alexander Graham Bell
and SHHH organizations are much more supportive of the whole
hearing impaired population than the NAD is - at least, they make
an effort to provide information for all aspects of hearing loss
and all communication modes.
Perhaps this is the reason NAD is in such dire straits - especially
with mismanagement, loss of funding and loss of members.
It's really a shame that many of you will not try to mingle with
the whole HI population and we all work together to improve things
for all of us.
All of us should use our experiences in helping the future generation
and trying to make things better for all instead of slapping this
way and that way simply because it didn't work for us.
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!385!14.0!Ann.Stalnaker
Internet: Ann.Stalnaker@p0.f14.n385.z1.fidonet.org