==============

Hi Josh, I’m a frequent lurker and mom of a newly-speaking/hearing deaf 2 YO with a CI — LOVED your book (and your NPR interview).

And, I thought this article was pretty great, too — you conducted the interview BY PHONE?? Amazing.

But, there is one statement I disagree with a little bit — unless I misinterpreted it, which could very well be the case. It fell right after one I totally agree with:
“A small child with severe hearing loss should be implanted as soon as possible.”

Yes! That early window of time between 0-3, when children most effectively acquire language, is the right time to implant (if you choose to implant, which is not right for everybody, of course).

But you then say: “Sign language can be learned down the road, but not English. It’s a no-brainer to me if you want the child to succeed in a hearing world.”

It may be that you weren’t recommending a trade-off at all (English vs. ASL), and were just expressing the urgency involved in getting the implant. And it may also be that you are emphasizing the importance of acquiring a written language to succeed in the hearing world, which I agree with. But I’ve seen a bit of discussion of that statement that seems to indicate to people that you are taking a position against acquiring ASL early. And it’s with that interpretation that I disagree.

My input, based on the bilingual method (English AND ASL, though not simultaneously) we’re using very successfully with our little ciborg is that the window doesn’t have to be exclusively devoted to just one language and closed to others for effective acquisition of a primary spoken language.

That critical point, before the brain loses all that wonderful toddler plasticity that allows it to really and amazingly rewire itself to the CI and the brand new task of hearing is also the right time to build ASL AND English or French or Mandarin or however many spoken languages a child has the capacity to take in (whether hearing, oral deaf, deaf with HAs, deaf with CIs, whatever the case may be).

And, while a nice-to-have language for everyone, for a profoundly and pre-lingually deaf child with a CI, ASL is a wonderful first or second language to use whenever that processor is off for the bath, for swimming, or for bed-time, or when with peers, teachers, or family members who are deaf without CIs. Or if, let’s say, she is tramping through Africa, someday, and her processor is stolen :) . OK, I suppose few people will happen to know American Sign Language vs. a local sign language, but let’s say she’s tramping through the wilds of Martha’s Vineyard over Christmas-time, loses her backpack, and Cochlear Americas and FedEx experience holiday lag and can’t get her that new processor for 2-3 weeks when she’s back home at a stable mailstop. How great will it be to have a fluency in a language that has some significant local currency and doesn’t require that amazing, but vulnerable tool so she doesn’t feel that sense of loss and helplessness you encountered when your hearing was suddenly GONE?

Although when the time comes, and she loses that backpack, boy will she be in big trouble at home!

the article is somewhat distorted, but he did say based on his experience. How is he to know that whether the ci would’ve worked on him had his parents had him implanted at 2 years old.

I, for one, am glad my parents didn’t do that. i find it completely bizarre because several of my friends, including myself and my sister all speak very well. Often times, people don’t realize i’m deaf until I mention it because of the fact I speak just like them! with multiple mispronuncations, mind you.

but I am becoming much more aware of how much I miss out of conversations that go on around me, especially at work. And it has come to be more frustrating. i think mainly because I’m so used to working independently, this job I’m at, asks for us to colloborate a lot with one another. And that’s only 1 of my reasons for considering a ci.

& i especially loved buffy. Obsessed with it.

I was just correcting JJ when he said: “AVT believes that CI children should MAXIMIZE all residual hearing that they have without the assistance of speech reading or sign language.”

CI users can do more than just maximize their ‘residual’ hearing.

http://www.springerlink.com/co.....218767748/

There are techniques being done to avoid damaging any residual hearing. And upon doing so many have found that with the preserved residual hearing for the most part along with cochlear implantation, the combined results showed that the electrical speechprocessing has substantially improved the speech perception abilities and hearing in noise. Music appreciation and quality of sound have also been maintained.
http://www.ohsu.edu/nod/docume.....0paper.pdf

CI users do not have any residual hearing. It’s actually destroyed during the procedure. CI users have ‘recreated’ (100%, but the brain needs to adjust to be able to process it, and in some cases, they don’t) sound through the use of the microphone on the processor. It’s not residual by any means.

And those three factors (parental involvement, good teachers, good income) often compound the picture when trying to see what kind of method works. For instance, if we have a successful CI user (who is also lucky enough to experience all 3), supporters may be quick to claim that it is the CI responsible for such success. How can they tell? Same goes for ASL advocates.

As always, the story isn’t simple.