Re: Cost effectivity of CI

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 6/2/2004 10:27:23 PM Pacific Standard Time,

jt1@... writes:

read there that though CI is expensive, compared to other prosthetic

devices, it is the most cost effective in terms of improving the quality of

life of the people. Would be great to know how it is computed.

If you think about it,,,,,, it not just surgery itself, with CI, it's improve

the chances of being employed, therefore, the cost it saves on welfare is one

of MOST costly problem with deaf population. About 10% of job are accessable

to the deaf, so many ended up on welfare, SSI or SSDI. Currently, SSI payout

in USA is about 550 a month, that times 12 months comes to bit over 6,660 a

year, if one can get off the welfare system, the CI pays for itself in less

than 10 years. Also think of medicaid/medicare cost, for mental health care as

well.

Lee

[Guest guest]

Jerome,

Having trouble sleeping? This will surely help put you to sleep.

*---* *---* *---* *---* *---*

Out for a quick byte.

--sign on the door of a computer store

& Gimlet (Guide Dawggie)

Portland, Oregon

N24C 3G 8/2000 Hookup

rlclark77@...

http://home.comcast.net/~rlclark77/

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 6/3/2004 10:15:33 AM Pacific Standard Time,

bingrao@... writes:

But that's the typical way they try to prove the cost effectiveness in

deaf education. Mainstream = lower costs, so anything that gets kids

mainstreamed faster is more cost effective.

Don't forget the cost to provide (welfare and mental health counseling, both

highly used by deaf community).

Lee

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 6/3/2004 10:58:42 AM Pacific Standard Time,

bingrao@... writes:

I agree that kids who get poor language bases and education as I have

seen with TC and oral program that are not language based like Auditory

Verbal pass through a lot of kids that are under employed.

I don't know about this one, I personally know of MANY 4 years college grads

who ended up on SSI or SSDI. One of my friends, a grad from University of

Washington, has been on SSDI for so long, even though she has dual degrees from

UW, one in Social Service and another in Public Relation. Another friend of

mine (we all graduated from HS, class of '77 or thereabout), had to be retrained

3 times, because each time she held a job, it was " replaced " by hearing

society.

In reality, if you look at " help wanted " ads, in newspaper, 90% of jobs

listed requires phone. That leaves 10% of jobs, usually underpaid for us to

look

for. Even if you apply for " phone required job " , the deafie are usually first

to be " removed " from interview process, once the interviewer meet us, even

though it is illegal.

Before I forget, let me tell you those who graduated from HS are all very

strong oralist. Many of us never knew signs until college or beyond. Nearly

everyone who were in HS, graduating prior to early 1980s were oralist,,,, as

Seattle Schools made it " forbidden " to use sign in school from mid-40s to 1972

or

1973. Even to this day, many of us are still a motor mouth (strong oralist).

It not only school, but WHOLE picture, looking at stats and all.

Lee

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 6/3/2004 10:21:22 AM Alaskan Daylight Time,

jt1@... writes:

> Do you mean all deaf people in USA use counseling? I didn't encounter that

> before, I wonder what it is.

>

> Regards/

> Jerome

>

My workplace forced me into counseling because they were absolutely sure that

I needed to do grief work after my hearing loss. What they didn't do was to

accommodate me so that I could understand the counselor. They were trying to

weaken me so I would just leave instead of using the ADA to entice them to

accommodate me so I could stay on the job. It was a losing battle though and I

finally did leave.

Recently I've been going thru voc rehab counseling to help me train and find

a different vocation from nursing or get my advanced nursing degrees. There

really is not much use for a deaf RN in a clinical setting.

Pam

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 6/3/2004 12:15:24 PM Pacific Standard Time,

wdywms@... writes:

Now this deafblind man is head

of a company he started.

That is wonderful, but many of us don't have that gift.

Lee

[Guest guest]

Jerome,

Niparko's group published a paper related to this in 1999 or 2000.

Their premise what that since kids with early CI's are mainstreamed

sooner, they are:

A) less expensive to educate and

will earn more money than signing deaf people because they will be

more like hearing people who earn more than signing deaf people.

The biggest problems I saw in the study were:

A) that they compared kids with early CI and the excellent s

Hopkins language-based aural habilitation program to kids in undefined

" Total Communication " programs for the age of mainstreaming. TC has long

been know to be ineffective. I wonder if they looked at a true BiBi

program or a good language-based Cued Speech early

intervention/preschool if the age off-set wouldn't have changed

significantly. Also, it would have been better to compare " Gold "

hearing aid users in fit at the same age as the CI kids and then

enrolled in the same Aural Hab program. Then any offset in age of

mainstream would really be attributable to the CI.

My strong sense is that the critical factor is the age at which the kid

is enrolled in a well structured language based Early Intervention

program. The CI certainly has the potential to accelerate things some

over hearing aids, but until someone actually compares these two groups

we won't know.

The cohort they used to define the average earning potential of

signing deaf adults were all from the Rubella epidemic on the early

1960's. This population is well known for a wide variety of additional

disabilities.

SO it was a study with a lot of seemingly careful math and statistics

based on a faulty apples/oranges comparison (IMO)

But that's the typical way they try to prove the cost effectiveness in

deaf education. Mainstream = lower costs, so anything that gets kids

mainstreamed faster is more cost effective.

It would also be interesting to follow up with these kids and kids of

all educational setting and look at SAT, GRE scores, college graduation

rates.

____________________________________________

Best Regards,

Brad Ingrao, M.S.Ed. CCC-A, FAAA

Editor

EDEN - The Electronic Deaf Education Network

www.bradingrao.com

e-mail: info@...

Cost effectivity of CI

Hi there,

I wonder if anyone know how to compute the cost effectivity of CI? I dig

into Jama & Archives (Archives of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery)

and read there that though CI is expensive, compared to other prosthetic

devices, it is the most cost effective in terms of improving the quality

of life of the people. Would be great to know how it is computed.

Thanks.

Regards/

Jerome

[Guest guest]

Lee,

Yes this is an issue, but I am not aware of any longitudinal studies

that suggest that kids well structured language based ASL (BiBi)

programs really use that much social service money. The vast majority

of the kids that have graduated form my son's school over the past 30+

years are all working, paying taxes and not on welfare.

I agree that kids who get poor language bases and education as I have

seen with TC and oral program that are not language based like Auditory

Verbal pass through a lot of kids that are under employed. But weak

language and poor education is really the issue, not CI or not CI.

What I'm saying is that the CI is not the only way to create deaf adults

who are not a drain on society. If anyone is aware of data that takes

into account the above and proves me wrong, I'd be very interested to

read it.

____________________________________________

Best Regards,

Brad Ingrao, M.S.Ed. CCC-A, FAAA

Editor

EDEN - The Electronic Deaf Education Network

www.bradingrao.com

e-mail: info@...

Re: Cost effectivity of CI

In a message dated 6/3/2004 10:15:33 AM Pacific Standard Time,

bingrao@... writes:

But that's the typical way they try to prove the cost effectiveness in

deaf education. Mainstream = lower costs, so anything that gets kids

mainstreamed faster is more cost effective.

Don't forget the cost to provide (welfare and mental health counseling,

both highly used by deaf community).

Lee

[Guest guest]

IIn a message dated 6/3/2004 2:58:01 PM Pacific Standard Time, nelly@...

writes:

In my opinion, it is safe to say that the

CI has had a tremendous cost-benefit to society when ALL factors are

considered - method of schooling, type of schooling, job salaries,

welfare or not, etc.

:::::::::clapping hands:::::::::::::::: cost effective is NOT just

education, its the whole picture.

BTW..... I think my point wasn't clearly explained, about " gift " , what I

mean,, yes it is true there is a gift in all of us, but not everyone is cut out

to be CEO, by choice or sloppy preparation.

YES,,,,,,, GO AND BUILD UP YOUR TAN,,,,,,,, for those who doesn't

know,,,,it's a nice 79 degrees in Seattle area.

Lee

[Guest guest]

Do you mean all deaf people in USA use counseling? I didn't encounter that

before, I wonder what it is.

Regards/

Jerome

Re: Cost effectivity of CI

In a message dated 6/3/2004 10:15:33 AM Pacific Standard Time,

bingrao@... writes:

But that's the typical way they try to prove the cost effectiveness in deaf

education. Mainstream = lower costs, so anything that gets kids

mainstreamed faster is more cost effective.

Don't forget the cost to provide (welfare and mental health counseling, both

highly used by deaf community).

Lee

[Guest guest]

Hi Brad,

I agree with you regarding the lack of comparison with hearing aid users. I

do think that it's hard to include hearing aid users in the study. One of

the issue will be the big difference in the performance, a hearing aid user

with mild hearing loss will be a lot of times better than someone who's

severe to profound. So the result wouldn't be consistent to be used as a

basis for references.

I wonder if there's any studies about late deafened adults...

Regards/

Jerome

RE: Cost effectivity of CI

Jerome,

Niparko's group published a paper related to this in 1999 or 2000.

Their premise what that since kids with early CI's are mainstreamed sooner,

they are:

A) less expensive to educate and

will earn more money than signing deaf people because they will be more

like hearing people who earn more than signing deaf people.

The biggest problems I saw in the study were:

A) that they compared kids with early CI and the excellent s Hopkins

language-based aural habilitation program to kids in undefined " Total

Communication " programs for the age of mainstreaming. TC has long been know

to be ineffective. I wonder if they looked at a true BiBi program or a good

language-based Cued Speech early intervention/preschool if the age off-set

wouldn't have changed significantly. Also, it would have been better to

compare " Gold "

hearing aid users in fit at the same age as the CI kids and then enrolled in

the same Aural Hab program. Then any offset in age of mainstream would

really be attributable to the CI.

My strong sense is that the critical factor is the age at which the kid is

enrolled in a well structured language based Early Intervention program.

The CI certainly has the potential to accelerate things some over hearing

aids, but until someone actually compares these two groups we won't know.

The cohort they used to define the average earning potential of signing

deaf adults were all from the Rubella epidemic on the early 1960's. This

population is well known for a wide variety of additional disabilities.

SO it was a study with a lot of seemingly careful math and statistics based

on a faulty apples/oranges comparison (IMO)

But that's the typical way they try to prove the cost effectiveness in deaf

education. Mainstream = lower costs, so anything that gets kids

mainstreamed faster is more cost effective.

It would also be interesting to follow up with these kids and kids of all

educational setting and look at SAT, GRE scores, college graduation rates.

____________________________________________

Best Regards,

Brad Ingrao, M.S.Ed. CCC-A, FAAA

Editor

EDEN - The Electronic Deaf Education Network www.bradingrao.com

e-mail: info@...

[Guest guest]

There is a deafblind man who had attended the deaf school. His father and

younger sibling also were deafblind, and the rest of the family members were

deaf. They communicated using ASL. This deafblind person somehow picked up

on the English language and read extensively. Now this deafblind man is head

of a company he started.

Re: Cost effectivity of CI

>

> In a message dated 6/3/2004 10:15:33 AM Pacific Standard Time,

> bingrao@... writes:

> But that's the typical way they try to prove the cost effectiveness in

> deaf education. Mainstream = lower costs, so anything that gets kids

> mainstreamed faster is more cost effective.

>

> Don't forget the cost to provide (welfare and mental health counseling,

> both highly used by deaf community).

>

> Lee

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

What business does he run? It's impressive to see deaf people become highly

successful. It's rare to see another Edison in this society.

Regards/

Jerome

Re: Cost effectivity of CI

There is a deafblind man who had attended the deaf school. His father and

younger sibling also were deafblind, and the rest of the family members were

deaf. They communicated using ASL. This deafblind person somehow picked up

on the English language and read extensively. Now this deafblind man is head

of a company he started.

Re: Cost effectivity of CI

>

> In a message dated 6/3/2004 10:15:33 AM Pacific Standard Time,

> bingrao@... writes:

> But that's the typical way they try to prove the cost effectiveness in

> deaf education. Mainstream = lower costs, so anything that gets kids

> mainstreamed faster is more cost effective.

>

> Don't forget the cost to provide (welfare and mental health counseling,

> both highly used by deaf community).

>

> Lee

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Yeah I agree. It's also great to know that they exist, it inspires us that

we can possibly have that potential.

Regards/

Jerome

Re: Cost effectivity of CI

In a message dated 6/3/2004 12:15:24 PM Pacific Standard Time,

wdywms@... writes:

Now this deafblind man is head

of a company he started.

That is wonderful, but many of us don't have that gift.

Lee

[Guest guest]

,

It has been my experience that deaf kids of deaf families have much

stronger first language skills than most other deaf kids. With a strong

first language, one can learn other languages. So having a strong early

base in Tactile ASL, his brain's language centers were well developed

and ready to learn the words and rules of English as well as other

languages.

____________________________________________

Best Regards,

Brad Ingrao, M.S.Ed. CCC-A, FAAA

Editor

EDEN - The Electronic Deaf Education Network

www.bradingrao.com

e-mail: info@...

Re: Cost effectivity of CI

There is a deafblind man who had attended the deaf school. His father

and younger sibling also were deafblind, and the rest of the family

members were deaf. They communicated using ASL. This deafblind person

somehow picked up on the English language and read extensively. Now this

deafblind man is head of a company he started.

Re: Cost effectivity of CI

>

> In a message dated 6/3/2004 10:15:33 AM Pacific Standard Time,

> bingrao@... writes:

> But that's the typical way they try to prove the cost effectiveness in

> deaf education. Mainstream = lower costs, so anything that gets kids

> mainstreamed faster is more cost effective.

>

> Don't forget the cost to provide (welfare and mental health

counseling,

> both highly used by deaf community).

>

> Lee

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hello All,

I've been reading the posts related to the cost effectiveness of the CI

in early childhood, and needless to say, I am amazed at some of the

responses. Shocked, even.

First of all, someone mentioned that a deaf-blind man eventually became

the head of a company he started, and someone else said that " it was

nice, but not all of us have that gift. " Pure crap! Each and every one

of us has that gift inside us, WE make the choice on whether we want to

nurture that gift to fruition or let it wither and die. I don't know

how many of you have heard of the 90-10 rule. Traditionally speaking,

90% of the wealth in the US is held by 10% of the Americans, the other

10% of wealth is held by the vast majority (90%) of the people. I find

this to hold true for people who are considered " extraordinary " such as

in the case of this deaf-blind man. He is one of 10% of exceptional

people because he made the decision to make sacrifices and work as hard

to get to where he wants to get. 90% of us don't even do this - we just

" go to school, get good enough grades to get by and graduate, find a job

with secure benefits and work hard enough not to get fired, etc., etc. "

If we are to become exceptional, as in the case of this deaf-blind man,

we have got to look within ourselves and find that gift and nurture it,

feed it, and care for it. Great things will happen if more people did

this, but the sad thing is, most of us do not.

As with Brad's comment on his experience showing that deaf children of

deaf parents generally have a stronger language base than their deaf

peers (read: deaf children of hearing parents). While this may hold

true for the overall picture, there are many other deaf children out

there who have hearing parents that are doing exceptionally well with

their hearing peers. I often look back and laugh at how my speech

therapist would say to my parents, on numerous occasions, that my

language skills will plateau, my writing skills will remain at a certain

level, etc. Not to brag or anything, but being a deaf student

mainstreamed in the public schools has its added perks, such as

extensive testing. I recall one such test that measured my vocabulary

skills, and at the age of 17 years old, my vocabulary skills were the

equivalent to that of a 34 year old. In other words, my vocabulary

skills were equal to that of someone twice my age AND I have a hearing

loss. Many people find it hard to believe that I am a deaf person, deaf

since the age of 6 months - an age where I'm considered prelingual. I

am the only deaf person in my family, and I was the first born child to

my parents. My parents made so many sacrifices, money-wise,

career-wise, and time-wise to make sure I had all the language tools I

needed to survive out in the 'real world'. Looking at my writing

skills, people wouldn't believe that I am deaf. In addition to my being

deaf, people's jaws drop when they find out how old I am. I'm 24. I

recall meeting another member on this forum for the first time in person

in St. Louis, and we agreed to meet at a hotel lobby at a certain time,

and I waited at the hotel when she came. I noticed a woman wandering

around, as if she were searching for someone, and upon closer

inspection, I noticed she had a CI, so I asked her if she was the person

I was supposed to meet. She replied that she was, and I told her that

we were looking for each other. She expected I'd be 35 or so, never

thought I'd be 22 (as I was at the time).

As much as I hate to generalize because quite a few people generalize on

people who are deaf; prelingually or otherwise, oral or sign, etc, I

must note that when I was living in Denver, CO a few years ago, I was

immersed in the Deaf culture for the first time ever. I honestly did

not like what I saw, and did not feel comfortable at all. Most of these

Deaf people were on SSI and other forms of welfare. They were very

dependent on others for their well-being. As we talk about the cost

effectiveness of the CI, I find that in this case, it may or may not be

a significant change on whether these people would have benefited (and

society as well) from the CI. I cringed whenever I'd hear of the next

person declining a job for the sole fact that they'd lose their welfare

benefits. It seemed all they wanted to do was party, get drunk, get

high on pot, and pretty much just waste their lives away - all on the

government's dime, and ultimately, on my own dime as well as yours.

Needless to say, it pissed me off, for lack of a better word. I left as

fast as I could, moved back to Seattle, stayed at my parents while I

worked and went back to school to finish up my degree. A lot of the

things I have been able to do would not have been possible if I did not

have my CI, and while I attribute the vast majority of my success to my

parents' persistence and resilience in raising me (and my 3 younger

siblings, while running 2 of their own businesses), I have found that a

lot of the things I am doing now can be attributed to my CI.

I honestly have to say that in my experience (my personal experience,

and that of others I have witnessed), the CI has really impacted

society, it has helped the majority (note, not ALL) of CI users to

become productive members of society, paying taxes, and upstanding

citizens. The people who rely on ASL and other methods of communication

are subsequently paid less, work at menial jobs, and often rely on

government assistance to survive, and they are very dependent on others.

Now, I'm not trying to turn this into an oralism/ASL war, but this has

been my personal experience. In my opinion, it is safe to say that the

CI has had a tremendous cost-benefit to society when ALL factors are

considered - method of schooling, type of schooling, job salaries,

welfare or not, etc.

That being said, a good book I recently read, " What's That Pig

Outdoors? " would be a good read for many of us. It is an autobiography

of this oral-deaf man who does not utilize any hearing aids or cochlear

implants, deafened at the age of 3 from meningitis back in 1945 (or so),

and eventually became a prominent editor at the Chicago Daily News. He

shares his personal views on ASL, and my views are very much in sync

with his. A must read for those who really want to understand my views.

Well, I'm going to enjoy the rare sunny Seattle weather before heading

back to work (on my lunch break), and yes, it is a full time job, and

yes, I'm still studying, 3 courses right now. ;^)

Best regards,

Andy

[Guest guest]

Andy,

Its not crap. Perhaps the word " gift " is not the proper one here,

bit still, the point is, that everyone sees the same things in

different ways and acts upon things in different ways. Much has to do

with where and when and how one grew up, the experiences the person

went thru, and all that.

Me for example. I want to have my own bakery. But I dont have

that " gift " to make it happen. And that is fine. I wont list excuses

on why not. That is between me and Gimlet.

If everyone had the ability to achieve the same lofty goals, where

would the garbage workers come from?

Next time you are in Portland, look us up. If you cannot find us,

I think you will need a new pair of glasses. LOL

(Gimlet says that was not nice, everyone can see her! She is truly

wise for a dawg.)

*---* *---* *---* *---* *---*

" At first there was nothing. Then God said 'Let there be light!' Then

there was still nothing. But you could see it. "

& Gimlet (Guide Dawggie)

Portland, Oregon

N24C 3G 8/2000 Hookup

rlclark77@...

http://home.comcast.net/~rlclark77/

[Guest guest]

> Hello All,

>

> I've been reading the posts related to the cost effectiveness of

the CI

> in early childhood, and needless to say, I am amazed at some of the

> responses. Shocked, even.

> (long but best part excluded)

> Best regards,

> Andy

Way To GO!!! I agree wholeheartedly

aka MrsCyot

Clarion HiRes Auria

Surgery 5/27/04

Hookup Scheduled 6/30/04

[Guest guest]

I'm in full agreement with Andy too. There is no doubt that the initial cost of

a CI is rather steep but the long term benefits for the CI recipient

substantially outweigh the initial cost and this is in every possible area from

early childhood to senior citizen.

Alice

[Guest guest]

He runs a deaf literary business called the Tactilt Mind.

Re: Cost effectivity of CI

> >

> > In a message dated 6/3/2004 10:15:33 AM Pacific Standard Time,

> > bingrao@... writes:

> > But that's the typical way they try to prove the cost effectiveness in

> > deaf education. Mainstream = lower costs, so anything that gets kids

> > mainstreamed faster is more cost effective.

> >

> > Don't forget the cost to provide (welfare and mental health counseling,

> > both highly used by deaf community).

> >

> > Lee

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Powerfully said, Andy!

RE: Cost effectivity of CI

> Hello All,

>

> I've been reading the posts related to the cost effectiveness of the CI

> in early childhood, and needless to say, I am amazed at some of the

> responses. Shocked, even.

>

> First of all, someone mentioned that a deaf-blind man eventually became

> the head of a company he started, and someone else said that " it was

> nice, but not all of us have that gift. " Pure crap! Each and every one

> of us has that gift inside us, WE make the choice on whether we want to

> nurture that gift to fruition or let it wither and die. I don't know

> how many of you have heard of the 90-10 rule. Traditionally speaking,

> 90% of the wealth in the US is held by 10% of the Americans, the other

> 10% of wealth is held by the vast majority (90%) of the people. I find

> this to hold true for people who are considered " extraordinary " such as

> in the case of this deaf-blind man. He is one of 10% of exceptional

> people because he made the decision to make sacrifices and work as hard

> to get to where he wants to get. 90% of us don't even do this - we just

> " go to school, get good enough grades to get by and graduate, find a job

> with secure benefits and work hard enough not to get fired, etc., etc. "

> If we are to become exceptional, as in the case of this deaf-blind man,

> we have got to look within ourselves and find that gift and nurture it,

> feed it, and care for it. Great things will happen if more people did

> this, but the sad thing is, most of us do not.

>

> As with Brad's comment on his experience showing that deaf children of

> deaf parents generally have a stronger language base than their deaf

> peers (read: deaf children of hearing parents). While this may hold

> true for the overall picture, there are many other deaf children out

> there who have hearing parents that are doing exceptionally well with

> their hearing peers. I often look back and laugh at how my speech

> therapist would say to my parents, on numerous occasions, that my

> language skills will plateau, my writing skills will remain at a certain

> level, etc. Not to brag or anything, but being a deaf student

> mainstreamed in the public schools has its added perks, such as

> extensive testing. I recall one such test that measured my vocabulary

> skills, and at the age of 17 years old, my vocabulary skills were the

> equivalent to that of a 34 year old. In other words, my vocabulary

> skills were equal to that of someone twice my age AND I have a hearing

> loss. Many people find it hard to believe that I am a deaf person, deaf

> since the age of 6 months - an age where I'm considered prelingual. I

> am the only deaf person in my family, and I was the first born child to

> my parents. My parents made so many sacrifices, money-wise,

> career-wise, and time-wise to make sure I had all the language tools I

> needed to survive out in the 'real world'. Looking at my writing

> skills, people wouldn't believe that I am deaf. In addition to my being

> deaf, people's jaws drop when they find out how old I am. I'm 24. I

> recall meeting another member on this forum for the first time in person

> in St. Louis, and we agreed to meet at a hotel lobby at a certain time,

> and I waited at the hotel when she came. I noticed a woman wandering

> around, as if she were searching for someone, and upon closer

> inspection, I noticed she had a CI, so I asked her if she was the person

> I was supposed to meet. She replied that she was, and I told her that

> we were looking for each other. She expected I'd be 35 or so, never

> thought I'd be 22 (as I was at the time).

>

> As much as I hate to generalize because quite a few people generalize on

> people who are deaf; prelingually or otherwise, oral or sign, etc, I

> must note that when I was living in Denver, CO a few years ago, I was

> immersed in the Deaf culture for the first time ever. I honestly did

> not like what I saw, and did not feel comfortable at all. Most of these

> Deaf people were on SSI and other forms of welfare. They were very

> dependent on others for their well-being. As we talk about the cost

> effectiveness of the CI, I find that in this case, it may or may not be

> a significant change on whether these people would have benefited (and

> society as well) from the CI. I cringed whenever I'd hear of the next

> person declining a job for the sole fact that they'd lose their welfare

> benefits. It seemed all they wanted to do was party, get drunk, get

> high on pot, and pretty much just waste their lives away - all on the

> government's dime, and ultimately, on my own dime as well as yours.

> Needless to say, it pissed me off, for lack of a better word. I left as

> fast as I could, moved back to Seattle, stayed at my parents while I

> worked and went back to school to finish up my degree. A lot of the

> things I have been able to do would not have been possible if I did not

> have my CI, and while I attribute the vast majority of my success to my

> parents' persistence and resilience in raising me (and my 3 younger

> siblings, while running 2 of their own businesses), I have found that a

> lot of the things I am doing now can be attributed to my CI.

>

> I honestly have to say that in my experience (my personal experience,

> and that of others I have witnessed), the CI has really impacted

> society, it has helped the majority (note, not ALL) of CI users to

> become productive members of society, paying taxes, and upstanding

> citizens. The people who rely on ASL and other methods of communication

> are subsequently paid less, work at menial jobs, and often rely on

> government assistance to survive, and they are very dependent on others.

> Now, I'm not trying to turn this into an oralism/ASL war, but this has

> been my personal experience. In my opinion, it is safe to say that the

> CI has had a tremendous cost-benefit to society when ALL factors are

> considered - method of schooling, type of schooling, job salaries,

> welfare or not, etc.

>

> That being said, a good book I recently read, " What's That Pig

> Outdoors? " would be a good read for many of us. It is an autobiography

> of this oral-deaf man who does not utilize any hearing aids or cochlear

> implants, deafened at the age of 3 from meningitis back in 1945 (or so),

> and eventually became a prominent editor at the Chicago Daily News. He

> shares his personal views on ASL, and my views are very much in sync

> with his. A must read for those who really want to understand my views.

>

> Well, I'm going to enjoy the rare sunny Seattle weather before heading

> back to work (on my lunch break), and yes, it is a full time job, and

> yes, I'm still studying, 3 courses right now. ;^)

>

> Best regards,

> Andy

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi ,

I think you can still start on your bakery. It's just that you can't expect

yourself to do everything. Bill Gates didn't run Microsoft all alone.

Regards/

Jerome

Re: Cost effectivity of CI

Andy,

Its not crap. Perhaps the word " gift " is not the proper one here, bit

still, the point is, that everyone sees the same things in different ways

and acts upon things in different ways. Much has to do with where and when

and how one grew up, the experiences the person went thru, and all that.

Me for example. I want to have my own bakery. But I dont have that

" gift " to make it happen. And that is fine. I wont list excuses on why

not. That is between me and Gimlet.

If everyone had the ability to achieve the same lofty goals, where would

the garbage workers come from?

Next time you are in Portland, look us up. If you cannot find us, I

think you will need a new pair of glasses. LOL

(Gimlet says that was not nice, everyone can see her! She is truly wise for

a dawg.)

*---* *---* *---* *---* *---*

" At first there was nothing. Then God said 'Let there be light!' Then there

was still nothing. But you could see it. "

& Gimlet (Guide Dawggie)

Portland, Oregon

N24C 3G 8/2000 Hookup

rlclark77@...

http://home.comcast.net/~rlclark77/

[Guest guest]

Well Jerome you can do everything but the baking, that is all I

want to do. LOL

*---* *---* *---* *---* *---*

OK, so what's the speed of dark?

--

& Gimlet (Guide Dawggie)

Portland, Oregon

N24C 3G 8/2000 Hookup

rlclark77@...

http://home.comcast.net/~rlclark77/

[Guest guest]

Hi Andy,

Thanks for sharing your opinions. I agree with you 100%. I have been a bit

concerned of the CI cost lately, as what Alice said, yes the cost is too

steep. And so I read some more articles on CI and found out the cost

effectivity thing, I'm glad to read there that eventhough CI cost is high,

it's consider one of the most cost effective prosthetic device out there in

terms of benefit for quality life. This made me bring up this question in

this forum.

Thanks again.

Regards/

Jerome

[Guest guest]

Hello all,

Thank you for your warm receptiveness to my email. I was afraid I was

going to start another ASL/Oralism war down towards the end! That's

another dead horse I don't want to have to beat again.

, sure you have the gift to make your dream a reality! If this

guy can start up his own company, AND he is deaf-blind, there's no

reason why you shouldn't be able to do so. You wrote: " If everyone

had the ability to achieve the same lofty goals, where would the garbage

workers come from? " If you want my perspective on this, here it is:

Everyone DOES have the ability to achieve THEIR own goals, not the " same

lofty goals " as you describe here. Matter of fact is, each and every

person is different, has different goals and different meanings of what

success is to them. Believe it or not, there IS someone out there who

wants to be the best damn garbage collector out there, just as there is

someone who wants to be the best janitor, or baseball player, or CEO, or

secretary.

What's stopping you from starting your own bakery? Is it lack of

information? Go to the library and do research, go online and do

research, talk with other bakers who have started their own successful

bakeries. Is it lack of capital? Go talk to the bank and Small

Business Administration (SBA) - they will give money to a sound business

plan that shows good profit potential. Or is it lack of the inner

desire? Only you can find that inner desire yourself. None of us can

do anything about it if you don't want it, and that is perfectly fine,

nothing wrong with that. Sure, I'd love to own a restaurant or hotel,

but I don't have the desire to actually own one . . . yet. It is a

definite possibility for me in the future. Point is, everyone DOES have

this 'gift', but each of us make the decision on what to do with this

gift.

Dixie, wonderful post! I am really happy to hear how well your

husband's niece's children are doing with their CI's! It truly is an

amazing thing for all of us to share this gift of sound (not to be

confused with the 'gift' I spoke of earlier! LOL) You wrote: " Their

hope and dream was to give them a chance in the hearing world. Their

thoughts are if their children choose to become part of the Deaf

culture, they have a choice as they grow older. " Beautiful! Couldn't

have said it any better! This was my parents' mantra as they raised me.

They wanted me to have every opportunity in the real world, and if I

should ever choose to become part of the Deaf culture because I would be

happier there, I would be free to make that decision. Needless to say,

I'm glad I haven't had to make that decision to join the Deaf culture

because I am extremely happy where I am now. Beautiful, Dixie!

Best regards,

Andy