Moot Thoughts & Musings

No offense here. ;) I'm really happy to see that you recognize that babies, deaf or hearing or differently-abled, are babies first. That emotional connection is so important to establish early in life for all babies. It cements the relationship between the parent and child for life. I *know* E will grow up loving you so much and will be thankful of you being a part of his deaf world because I have a mother like that. My friends remind me all the time how lucky I am to have a mother who signs and that I can communicate with, beyond a superficial level. I was up reading late last night too and found something that may be of interest to you and related to your post; feel free to share:

http://bp1.blogger.com/_9Ry-Jq8eA1M/ReMETOdAV4I/AAAAAAAAAAs/nyUVy4It3oU/s1600-h/Deafchild.jpg

We deaf can't buck the system. Why? Because the choice and decision belong to the parents only. So don't you fret about us. Different perspectives help us to get along with people. I enjoy reading your blogs because I am a parent, too. To tell you the truth, I wouldn't know what I would do if I had a deaf baby. So you have helped me a lot to see things differently.

I suppose the parents you're reading about think they know what deafness is like and think it's something they have to "cure" their kid of as soon as possible. It's sort of like women who are so afraid of the pain of labor that they don't want to learn about it at all (even though understanding can help the pain, ironically), so they make up their minds to get an epi the minute they set foot in the hospital. Few parents take the time to see many sides of an issue the way you do, but honestly, your approach is a terrific model for a parent facing any kind of new or potentially adverse situation.

And speaking of signing, I've started recording Signing Time on public TV. So far, Kent and I have watched "Zoo Train," so if Ellis wants to talk about animals in very general terms when/if we see you guys in November, I'm all about it. =)

You know, erica, it's funny that you brought that up, because over and over again I read deaf polemic/prenatal care polemic and i find a lot of the same thoughts popping up over and over. When you are pregnant, you are not sick, you do not need to be cured, you do need to take of yourself, and you do have a lot to learn to manage when the going gets tough (in labor). When you are deaf, you are not sick, you do not need to be cured, but there are some things that will help make your little easier (like videophones, sidekicks, or assistive devices of choice).

We love zoo train! :-)

I feel the same way when I read some blogs. I used to feel up-lifted when I read them knowing that they were experiencing the same types of things I was, but now I feel a bit disheartened when I read all the decisions for bi-laterals so quickly and for not signing at all with their kids. I just wonder how Isaac and all his implanted peers will feel about the decisions parents make later in life. We know Isaac is deaf and we embrace that about him. We still sign with him even when he drops signs and tries to use his voice only. I think that too much emphasis is placed on having them "catch-up" to hearing peers. I get so upset sometimes when I go to CHOP because I feel like they are trying to push him into mainstream education ASAP. I want to leave the decision to Isaac. I want him to decide if he wants to sign or speak or both! I want him to maintain some semblance of Deaf Culture even though it is not prevalent where we live. Isaac is different from other un-implanted deaf children, but he is not like hearing children either. We want him to feel comfortable around both groups and have a strong concept of who he is. We want to learn about his personality and aspects other than his hearing too. I say a big AMEN to this post!

I understand the idea that being pregnant is not being sick. But I'm wary of the idea that "when you are deaf...you do not need to be cured". Yes, you're not "sick", but in the Bible Jesus healed many deaf people. To me that sets deafness apart from pregnancy. It is not a "normal" part of being who God made us to be. It is part of the brokeness, part of the result of sin in the world, part of its misery. And that is why we strive to "fix" it. We have a natural desire to repair the "brokeness". In modern times CAN fix these, and I think that's only natural. We don't neglect glasses or contacts because we can't see and then say that's just part of "who we are". Deafness seems to be the same to me.
Hearing brings us into relationships; with signing, the possibility of being in relationships is far better than in years past. Our desire to have more relationships also drives that desire for hearing.

Aunt Sperlonga, I'm kind of tapping into a background polemic when I talk about deafness not being sick. Some people will catch it. Whatever. It is a little different. A deaf person is totally healthy. There's no need to find an urgent cure. They simply cannot hear. If you start talking about "fixing" deafness, you engage in a complicated political discussion with a lot of background. I'm all for assisstive devices; I think they're especially important to help with learning how to speak. But calling that "fixing" E is fraught with a lot of connotations that would position me politically in a place I don't want to be (or really advocate at all).

No, deaf isn't how God originally created our ears, but the fact is after the fall some people He created deaf, and I think that we can enjoy that. Maybe it is indicative of a greater state of brokenness, but is fixing that brokenness necessarily giving someone auditory access? When Jesus talks about "ears to hear", He's not talking about literal ears. I don't care if E's physical ears hear or not, but I do care that his soul hears.

Going back to pregnancy. Pain in labor is part of the brokenness of this post-fall world, too. But I believe that trying to "fix" that pain is usually unnecessary, too. for what it's worth...

>>But I believe that trying to "fix" that pain is usually unnecessary, too.

I guess it depends on what you mean by trying to "fix" it--even "natural" childbirth approaches try to alleviate pain. And there are so many factors to giving birth that avoiding any kind of pain management (whether "natural" or "artificial") seems like kind of a sweeping judgment, imho. I wouldn't have thought about this that much if I wasn't going through a pregnancy that was more complicated than normal, b/c of twins (and knowing so many different kinds of difficulties that can happen with pregnancy, or even so many ranges of pain tolerance or situational differences for women).

Just for an example, some twin moms might have to make the difficult choice between taking an epidural, or really pushing to go all natural, and then not having the energy to push out two babies, and as a result having to have a more invasive c-section (it happens!!). Even non-twin moms might have to make similar choices for different reasons. I might not even have that choice unless our boy turns, you know?

Sorry, didn't mean to hijack the thread!

Well... I am one whose sons got their CIs at 6 and 9 months. And guess what? I'm an La Leche League Leader-- so they were BF for years. :-) My youngest was born at home in the bathtub, as a planned homebirth (with no pain meds, of course). It certainly isn't typical of us to expose our kids randomly to germs! When Elliot was implanted (at 9 months) we had months of what felt like excruciating waiting, reading, writing to people, going to conferences, etc. Believe me, we put years into those months. We did tons of research, read books from all sorts of authors, etc. But we also spent lots of time loving and playing with him.

Don't assume that just because people try to optimize the period of fastest brain growth that they are ignoring the beauty of their child. As someone who practices attachment parenting, lives in a sling and BFs routinely, I think you ought to know that though you may wonder about us because your course was a bit different (in your quest to get a CI), that doesn't make us any less in love with our kids.

It is false to assume that those who move quickly about the CI process are less involved with the wholistic care of their infant. While there is no illness involved in deafness, there is a change in the brain processing as the deaf person grows, and if a parent would like to offer the maximum opportunity for typical brain development, they are wise to choose to implant as soon as is safely possible. Be careful what you criticize. Someday, parents who wait a long time (or don't offer the CI at all) may be criticized for what was lost. Having been around kids implanted both early and late, I can testify that the kids who are implanted older have a more difficult time learning language, in general, than the younger ones. I'm not saying that your son was one of those, but I do know a parent whose 4 year old was implanted and she feels like they narrowly avoided being hit by a truck. It was that dramatic-- they feel like they barely made it. They regret the time they lost, and acknowledge that by that time there was quite a bit of difficulty by their immediate family and extended family and friends to communicate with their son.

I know that the appointments, the surgeries, etc. are all difficult and time consuming, but they are all worth it and the sacrifice we were willing to make in order to offer our boys the best. It's just like our decision 13 years ago to breastfeed our first (hearing) child, to avoid lead paint, to read a lot to him, to help him eat healthy foods, etc. When I hear teens and college aged kids thanking their parents for their CIs (and I have heard this!) it reminds me of the fact that this is agood thing to do for our kids, and I'm glad that we did it young so that we have all of childhood to talk to them. Like your aunt (?) above, we actually believe that Jesus would want our kids to be able to hear, and that he is pleased that we can offer the current scientific advances to them. Every day people comment on how great the CIs are, how amazed they are that my boys can hear/talk, etc. It's a clear advantage!

Cheers, and congrats on the progress your son has made. I noticed in one of your pics that you were wearing a sling, so I thought I'd mention that we have used them with all 4 boys very happily (and, I've sewn ones, as well). I make my own cloth diapers, also. That's unrelated to this post, but I thought you might be interested. :-) Sorry if that's too much information...

I think my real point is that we have chosen different methodologies, but have both gotten CIs for our kids, and that those of us who beat down doors to get them early are not pariahs or terrible people who just have ill intent. We love our kids and based our choices on what we thought would be best for them. Just like you.

well, I certainly don't think you love your children less.

However, I do believe that time isn't lost learning language when signing. There are certain synapses in the brain for learning spoken language that are best utilized in the early years. I just think you don't have to rush the little babies through it if you sign. *shrug* That's how we've approached it for our family. I believe my attachment parenting mentality feeds into that, because I see what the babies strengths are try to utilize those (his visual sense), as well as bringing in things that will help areas where he isn't as strong (his sense of hearing). His AVT therapist remarked that over and over again that she notices kids who sign before their CIs are getting it faster, because they never had a day without language. *shrug* I don't know; it just makes sense to me. And it allows us to slow down during those early baby months.

The implication was that we missed out on our child's infancy, and I wanted to let you know that isn't the case for us. Sure, we were tired, but I remember that when we did attempt sign for a few months we were depressed and exhausted at the few words we could recall and the fact that we could not even get our baby's attention! Eye focus and concentration isn't even available for signing prior to 4-6 months old, so by the time we were realizing we were going the AVT route, we hadn't gotten far with our attempts at SEE. I can't say that we felt relaxed trying to desperately remember signs. We knew our language attempts were feeble, at best.

So once we had the implant in place and got on the road with the language of choice, one we all could share, things went a lot better.

I do wonder about an AVT who would say that... since that not only isn't what I've seen in large CI gatherings (Cochlear Kids Camp in the Rockies, etc.) but doesn't mesh with AV philosophy. In our case, the kids who we saw who were implanted earliest did the best, and then when comparing signing versus those who were only speaking, the speaking kids were talking more clearly and had a better grasp of English.

Now, with kids getting them so early these days in general, it is possible that signing some in infancy, while perhaps not being necessary, may also not be detrimental... I just know that once they are learning to hear, they will learn the language which is focused on. Kids in TC environments always did more poorly, and kids who continue to emphasize visual sense over auditory will not do as well with spoken language. It just depends on your goals, really. Since our goal was spoken, we needed the implant in place ASAP so that we could avoid missing out on language once a child is of the age that they begin to use it. The kids implanted under a year are showing results of being on par with hearing peers with basically no lag time, so that's pretty cool.

Deaf babies are not born with any stronger visual sense, it is only developed over time to take over pathways normally dedicated to audition. So, we are trying to normalize the pathways, rather than continue down that course which we don't want to encourage. We know that once those pathways are formed, they are not easily changed.

I'm all for slowing down the baby months, though. I think every day parents have to remind themselves of cutting down on extra activities or mindless drudgery if they can. I know that, having 4 boys, I try to not over schedule so that we can still have some evenings and weekend times to relax. :-) However, it's been a loong time since I've been to a coffee shop by myself... so I'm really jealous about that!

I am totally not trying to criticize you or your son, as I think it sounds like you're happy and achieving what you desire, and he's doing well. But I want you to know that we are not blithering idiots or crazy over-achievers or some other sort of weird thing. We just wanted the best for our sons, and having looked at all the options, chose what we thought would work for us.

Thank you for taking the time to read my blog and respond thoughtfully. We may never see eye to eye on certain things, but I appreciate the time you have taken to explain your perspective. I will definitely keep your words in mind. Perhaps I will see you around the internet.