›
This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

"My Son is Deaf, Finally"

trogdor9trogdor9
edited September 2010 in Everything Else
Make sure to watch this all the way through to the end.
-YN5Fdz1En0

I'm curious about your thoughts on this video. Background information available here

Comments

  • SailSail
    edited September 2010
    I started to see where this video was going about halfway through. I've never thought of cochlear implants as bad before. He makes an interesting argument, but I'm not sure how far the argument goes against something so objectively useful like hearing. Can you really deny that being able to hear in a world that is designed for hearing people would make life easier? I don't know.
    Post edited by Sail on
  • NuriNuri
    I could tell where this was going from the time he first introduced that they wanted their son to be deaf. I get his point. The only problem with his premise is that brain development changes as a child ages, and once a child is 18 it will be much more difficult for his brain to learn hearing. A cochlear implant at a young age allows the development and learning of language to occur much more quickly and permanently. It's not like a circumcision where there is no developmental impact. If the child is ever going to get one, very young is the time to do it. Otherwise it will be like trying to learn any other new language at 18 x100. Instead of just learning new words and sounds, your brain would have to learn how to process sound altogether.
  • trogdor9trogdor9
    The thing is, Deaf people have a very strong culture and community that isn't present in the blind or paralyzed. This comes entirely from the fact that humans communicate primarily through speaking. Deaf people use sign language to communicate with each other, but communication with hearing people becomes very difficult. This inherently separates the Deaf from "normal people," for lack of a better term, much more than blindness or paralysis does. I'm hesitant to even make the comparison, as Deaf people often do not view deafness as a disability at all. Deaf people see the cochlear implant as the thing that could potentially kill off their culture. So, is it right of us to eradicate deafness when Deaf people are very capable of living on their own and remaining deaf in their community?
  • OmnutiaOmnutia
    Wait, we are all aiming for an integrated society, right?
  • NuriNuri
    edited September 2010
    Vaccines mostly eradicated a culture of belief that virulent illnesses were the wrath of the gods. Does that make them bad?

    If the culture is worthwhile and not just a way of coping, then it will stay around. If you chose, you can still teach your child sign language even if they can hear. That's like saying only black people can be part of black culture. If a black family adopts a white kid and raises them along with the family, is that kid any less part of black culture because of their lack of skin pigment? No. You want a kid to experience or be part of deaf culture? Then make it happen. They don't have to be deaf. Translators are always in high demand anyway.

    ETA: Anyone with mechanically-enabled hearing should learn sign language anyway. What happens if something is damaged or goes wrong with an implant? A good contingency plan would be to know sign language.
    Post edited by Nuri on
  • WindUpBirdWindUpBird
    ETA: Anyone with mechanically-enabled hearing should learn sign language anyway. What happens if something is damaged or goes wrong with an implant? A good contingency plan would be to know sign language.
    Just rewire. It's easy enough. Also, electrodes are getting smaller and more complex all the the time. An upgrade now can give up the ability to listen to music with the proper software.

    Let that sink in for a moment. An operation that takes from 1.5-5 hours can give a person who has lost all natural hearing the ability to listen to Ravel's Bolero. Human ingenuity is incredible.
  • trogdor9trogdor9
    You ignored the question, WindUpBird. A friend of mine went for a few weeks this summer without his implant because the microphone was shot due to moisture buildup or something to that effect. Shrink the electrodes all you want, but stuff goes wrong all the time. If he didn't know sign language, he wouldn't even be able to communicate with his family.
  • WindUpBirdWindUpBird
    My point was that we just need to make the upkeep of the devices easier and maintenance faster. Largely, we're succeeding. Sign language is a perfectly acceptable fallback, but there is no reason on earth not to implant. Maybe I'm showing bias as part of the hearing majority, but I believe that a full sensorium is tantamount to every human's well-being.
  • NuriNuri
    My point was that we just need to make the upkeep of the devices easier and maintenance faster. Largely, we're succeeding. Sign language is a perfectly acceptable fallback, but there is no reason on earth not to implant. Maybe I'm showing bias as part of the hearing majority, but I believe that a full sensorium is tantamount to every human's well-being.
    I wasn't saying we shouldn't implant. Even rewiring wouldn't be immediate, so you would need some way to communicate in the meantime. I was addressing the concern that the culture would die if deafness were significantly reduced.
  • WindUpBirdWindUpBird
    edited September 2010
    Even rewiring wouldn't be immediate, so you would need some way to communicate in the meantime. I was addressing the concern that the culture would die if deafness were significantly reduced.
    Yeah, I don't think it would die, but there seems to be a significant part of Deaf culture that is at odds with any neuroprosthesis at all. I have a hard time resolving my respect for Deaf culture with my natural distrust of neo-luddism.
    Post edited by WindUpBird on
  • trogdor9trogdor9
    I have a hard time resolving my respect for Deaf culture with my natural distrust of neo-luddism.
    This is the big thing that I'm struggling with here. I want to respect them so much, but I can't bring myself to agree with them on this subject. At the same time, I can't help but feel that I'm being insensitive to their cause.
  • KapitänTimKapitänTim
    $150,000? I would have done it for a thousand bucks, a round trip plane ticket and room and board.
    Photobucket
  • KapitänTimKapitänTim
    OK. All jokes aside it would be a terrible thing to take away a child's hearing. I have no problem with giving a child the ability to hear. If a child was born without one of their legs would you make them live in a wheel chair till they were 18 and then decide if they want a prosthesis? Do we force children with cleft pallets to wait till they are 18 for surgery? Ears are for hearing.
Sign In or Register to comment.