RE: Re: Bilateral regrets ?

[Guest guest]

Ted,

Why not? Just as some may regret getting one implant, would going

bilateral not be the same? Too high expectations? True its better to look

for the positives but, life is not always like that, is it?

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

Show me a piano falling down a mine shaft and I'll show you A -flat miner.

& Dreamer Doll ke7nwn

Newport, Oregon

N24C 3G 8/2000 Hookup

rclark0276@...

http://webpages.charter.net/dog_guide/

[Guest guest]

I apologize. I didn't mean to be vague. I have been successfully

implanted with one ear and have recently been exploring whether or not

to go bilateral. I have done a lot of research and have seen a lot of

positive comments from professionals and users but I want to be able

to weeing in negative possibilities in making a a decisions

On Nov 25, 2007 2:15 PM, <rclark0276@...> wrote:

>

>

>

>

>

>

> Ted,

> Why not? Just as some may regret getting one implant, would going

> bilateral not be the same? Too high expectations? True its better to look

> for the positives but, life is not always like that, is it?

>

> *---* *---* *---* *---* *---*

> Show me a piano falling down a mine shaft and I'll show you A -flat miner.

> & Dreamer Doll ke7nwn

> Newport, Oregon

> N24C 3G 8/2000 Hookup

> rclark0276@...

> http://webpages.charter.net/dog_guide/

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

-

I am a bilateral CI user. I have been deaf since I was born. I got

them when I was 20. I'm now 23. But anyways, I have noticed so many

sounds. I'm really glad I got them at once bc I actually can hear more

with both instead of just one. (I've tried using just one and I didn't

hear as much as using two...) no regrets at all.

--

[Guest guest]

If I may butt in, most people would go ahead if the there is nothing to

lose and the copayments are modest. However, if there is still

something coming out of the other ear, you may want to hang on to it.

**************

On Nov 25, 2007, at 1:15 PM, wrote:

> Ted,

> Why not? Just as some may regret getting one implant, would going

> bilateral not be the same? Too high expectations? True its better to

> look

> for the positives but, life is not always like that, is it?

>

> *---* *---* *---* *---* *---*

> Show me a piano falling down a mine shaft and I'll show you A -flat

> miner.

> & Dreamer Doll ke7nwn

> Newport, Oregon

> N24C 3G 8/2000 Hookup

> rclark0276@...

> http://webpages.charter.net/dog_guide/

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I have the implant on the right ear implanted April 3rd, 2007. Is been a great

journey and last Nov 12 I went to see my doctor for 6 months post-activation

appointment. We are starting the process for bilateral implantation on the left

side. My hearing aid on the left side no longer gives me the benefits and I

don't use it any more.

I am not retire and I am still working have my own business, Software

Consulting. Therefore, I need to hear as much as I can.

" Ted F. " <ted.fletcher@...> wrote:

That sounds much better, when you put it like that, . Your first

message made it sound as though you might have been a disgruntled

customer who went bi-lateral and didnt get the results they expected.

No aplogy is required. Good luck in your endeavours.

I only have the one implant, but would get the 2nd one without any

hesitation. My implanted ear has taken over now and the other ear is

just there for the ride. The hearing aid in it is still very helpful

though, in giving me a better rounded sound, but the ear on its own is

useless.

Ted F.

>

> I apologize. I didn't mean to be vague. I have been successfully

> implanted with one ear and have recently been exploring whether or

> not to go bilateral. I have done a lot of research and have seen a

> lot of positive comments from professionals and users but I want to

> be able to weeing in negative possibilities in making a a decisions

>

---------------------------------

Get easy, one-click access to your favorites. Make your homepage.

[Guest guest]

Ted-

What is it like to have a CI and a HA? I have heard that people liked

having two CIs more than having a CI and a HA because the sounds sound

better...

--

[Guest guest]

Ted,

I am amazed that you would agree that the government should never pay for a

second CI. Even though that is not what you have said in so many words, that

is the implication. Let me tell you a little story:

In 1996 I needed new hearing aids as the ones I was wearing were failing. I

was at the time " between jobs " -- AKA unemployed. I was also a single mother

with a 9 year old daughter. At that time I was living in NYS. I went to

VESID to open a new file to get the new hearing aids as I did not have the

funds to do this myself. I was then sent to an audiologist at a center

nearby. After a number of visits and subsequent testing of various hearing

aids, the audiologist was ready to make her recommendation. Now, based on my

trials with the HA's, we had determined that the one's that worked best for

me was a particular digital HA. But, these were, at that time, very

expensive, and to that date (according to the audiologist, and the people at

VESID) NYS had refused to pick up the tab for those hearing aids. Thus, she

told me she was making two recommendations: for the expensive aids and also

for an alternate make/model that would SUFFICE, but not be as good as the

digital aids.

I then instructed her to make only ONE recommendation: for the expensive

digital aids. She was very hesitant to do so as she felt that I could wind

up losing out and having to re-apply and go through the process again. But

I was firm. I explained to her that as long as she gave the State the

opportunity to purchase cheaper HA's for me, that is what they would do. Why

should they care what is best for me? At the end of the day, she was

persuaded to do as I asked, albeit with major reservations.

I received a call from VESID offices, telling me that they had received the

formal recommendation and had put the request through but that I should not

get my hopes up as NYS had never paid for such expensive HA's at that point.

But, again, I reassured them and told them that I have a very strong belief

that NYS WOULD pay for them.

Two weeks later (it might have been three but I do not remember) we had our

answer: NYS would release the funds for the purchase of the requested

hearing aids! The VESID officers were overjoyed and majorly surprised.

(They later told me that they were happy about the results because it paved

the way for future HA's purchased for other needy HOH people in NYS. I was

glad to hear that.)

A lesser HA would have improved my hearing, true, but would not have

afforded me as much improvement. We need to reach high - to attain the same

accesiblity to jobs, recreation, education, and anything in the public

sphere - as those who able bodied. I respectfully disagree with your

statement that the government has the right to deny a bilateral CI to person

based on the idea that a single CI " improves their hearing " . If a bilateral

CI would allow a person to function even more closely to the functioning

level of a hearing person, then a person who needs the bilateral CI should

be enabled to receive it.

I have difficulties using the phone, and in noisy situations -- and believe

me, these difficulties are truly detriments to my ability to get, keep, and

perform a job. If I were able to use the phone without difficulty and to

network more easily in noisy situations, I would have done much better in my

career and been able to increase my earning power. Unfortunately, that has

not been the case. And, if I were denied the right to such improvements in

my life, even paid for by my government, that would enable me to become a

better and more productive worker in the workplace, then I would think

something is wrong with our system.

Ok, I am climbing down off my soapbox now...I just had to say that.

Stern

For Shalva's Special Children, Dreams Really Do Come True...

American Friends of Shalva

Stern

Office Manager / Gift Accounting & Systems Manager

<mailto:rachel@...> rachel@...

<http://maps./py/maps.py?Pyt=Tmap & addr=315+Fifth+Ave & csz=New+York%2

C+NY+++10016 & country=us> 315 Fifth Ave

Suite 608

New York, NY 10016

tel:

<http://www.plaxo.com/click_to_call?src=jj_signature & To=212.725.0900 & Email=r

susselj@...> 212.725.0900

fax: 212.725.5624

[Guest guest]

and Ted,

I found 's comments interesting and sensible too. As a deafblind

person with one CI and one deaf ear, I can attest to the fact that having a

half set of working ears is not good enough.

You've all heard the argument, we were born with two ears for a reason.

Two ears is not surplus. Two eyes, two arms and hands, two legs. Surplus?

No.

The argument that government should only pay for one CI so that more can

benefit is not acceptable. If it was, we would see many more amputees with

one prosthetic arm or leg.

I cannot go bilateral because government (Medicare) will not cover the

2nd CI. Yet they will cover two prosthetic arms or two prosthetic legs.

Many who have one CI do just fine. I challenge those to wear blindfolds

for a few days and come back and tell me, one CI is just fine.

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

Those who get too big for their britches will be exposed in the end.

& Dreamer Doll ke7nwn

Newport, Oregon

N24C 3G 8/2000 Hookup

rclark0276@...

http://webpages.charter.net/dog_guide/

[Guest guest]

Ted,

It sounds like you just re-affirmed what you said before. If it is govt.

policy that they pay for one CI, regardless of whether a second CI would

better enable a person to be more productive member of our society then I

think that is plain wrong. I do not think we should be happy receiving only

half of our due. If one CI enables me to work as a cashier but not as a

manager, then darn it all, I better get that second CI.

You are right in one thing, though - it is NOT a perfect world. And because

it is not a perfect world, that why we must always be willing to fight for

what is right.

(And I am not going to make my views on Iraq public here)

Teaneck, NJ

_____

From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of

Ted F.

Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2007 1:37 AM

Subject: Re: Bilateral regrets ?

, you went a long way round to misconstrue the meaning of my

post.

It is GOVERNMENT POLICY that they will only pay for one C.I. They are

not going to change it for Ted Fletcher. When I said that I agreed

with that, it was in the context that I am happy that twice as many

people would have access to the same level of hearing I have achieved

with one C.I. I have also written here, that I would have the second

C.I. in a heartbeat, should the aforementioned government policy

change. Its NOT a perfect world.

We have just had a change of government on the weekend in Australia

and when they pull our troops out of Iraq, they will have that money

to spend on something else. Who knows what that might be....

Ted F.

>

> Ted,

>

> I am amazed that you would agree that the government should never

pay for a

> second CI. Even though that is not what you have said in so many

words, that

> is the implication. Let me tell you a little story:

>

> In 1996 I needed new hearing aids as the ones I was wearing were

failing. I

> was at the time " between jobs " -- AKA unemployed. I was also a

single mother

> with a 9 year old daughter. At that time I was living in NYS. I

went to

> VESID to open a new file to get the new hearing aids as I did not

have the

> funds to do this myself. I was then sent to an audiologist at a

center

> nearby. After a number of visits and subsequent testing of various

hearing

> aids, the audiologist was ready to make her recommendation. Now,

based on my

> trials with the HA's, we had determined that the one's that worked

best for

> me was a particular digital HA. But, these were, at that time,

very

> expensive, and to that date (according to the audiologist, and the

people at

> VESID) NYS had refused to pick up the tab for those hearing aids.

Thus, she

> told me she was making two recommendations: for the expensive aids

and also

> for an alternate make/model that would SUFFICE, but not be as good

as the

> digital aids.

>

> I then instructed her to make only ONE recommendation: for the

expensive

> digital aids. She was very hesitant to do so as she felt that I

could wind

> up losing out and having to re-apply and go through the process

again. But

> I was firm. I explained to her that as long as she gave the State

the

> opportunity to purchase cheaper HA's for me, that is what they

would do. Why

> should they care what is best for me? At the end of the day, she

was

> persuaded to do as I asked, albeit with major reservations.

>

> I received a call from VESID offices, telling me that they had

received the

> formal recommendation and had put the request through but that I

should not

> get my hopes up as NYS had never paid for such expensive HA's at

that point.

> But, again, I reassured them and told them that I have a very

strong belief

> that NYS WOULD pay for them.

>

> Two weeks later (it might have been three but I do not remember) we

had our

> answer: NYS would release the funds for the purchase of the

requested

> hearing aids! The VESID officers were overjoyed and majorly

surprised.

> (They later told me that they were happy about the results because

it paved

> the way for future HA's purchased for other needy HOH people in

NYS. I was

> glad to hear that.)

>

> A lesser HA would have improved my hearing, true, but would not have

> afforded me as much improvement. We need to reach high - to attain

the same

> accesiblity to jobs, recreation, education, and anything in the

public

> sphere - as those who able bodied. I respectfully disagree with

your

> statement that the government has the right to deny a bilateral CI

to person

> based on the idea that a single CI " improves their hearing " . If a

bilateral

> CI would allow a person to function even more closely to the

functioning

> level of a hearing person, then a person who needs the bilateral CI

should

> be enabled to receive it.

>

> I have difficulties using the phone, and in noisy situations -- and

believe

> me, these difficulties are truly detriments to my ability to get,

keep, and

> perform a job. If I were able to use the phone without difficulty

and to

> network more easily in noisy situations, I would have done much

better in my

> career and been able to increase my earning power. Unfortunately,

that has

> not been the case. And, if I were denied the right to such

improvements in

> my life, even paid for by my government, that would enable me to

become a

> better and more productive worker in the workplace, then I would

think

> something is wrong with our system.

>

> Ok, I am climbing down off my soapbox now...I just had to say that.

>

> Stern

>

> For Shalva's Special Children, Dreams Really Do Come True...

> American Friends of Shalva

> Stern

>

> Office Manager / Gift Accounting & Systems Manager

> <mailto:rachel@...> rachel@...

>

> <http://maps. <http://maps./py/maps.py?> /py/maps.py?

Pyt=Tmap & addr=315+Fifth+Ave & csz=New+York%2

> C+NY+++10016 & country=us> 315 Fifth Ave

> Suite 608

> New York, NY 10016

> tel:

> <http://www.plaxo. <http://www.plaxo.com/click_to_call?>

com/click_to_call?

src=jj_signature & To=212.725.0900 & Email=r

> susselj@...> 212.725.0900

> fax: 212.725.5624

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

What other institutions of government (aside UK, Scandinavia and few

others), law and regulations that provides CI to those who have endured

high degree of hearing loss? Are we talking about half full/half empty?

Alfred

***************

On Nov 27, 2007, at 12:43 AM, Ted F. wrote:

> Its not a perfect world though is it ? You know that. In a

> perfect world, everyone would get what they asked for.

>

> Be grateful for the one C.I. you do have, even though it might not be

> as many as you would like. Doesnt it make life more comfortable for

> you, or would you rather have none than one?

>

> Ted F.

>

>

> >

> > and Ted,

> > I found 's comments interesting and sensible too. As a

> > deafblind person with one CI and one deaf ear, I can attest to the

> > fact that having a half set of working ears is not good enough.

> >

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Ted,

If the world was perfect we would not even be here. LOL

" Be grateful for the one C.I. you do have, even though it might not be

as many as you would like. "

If everyone took that positiion, we would have even less. We get what

we need by pushing for it, not by sitting back and feeling grateful. And we

have to coninue to fight for what we have now because if we dont, we lose

that too.

Blindfold yourself for a week and tell me next week if one CI is still

more than sufficient to meet your needs.

Is it charity when government gives us what we need? Or is it more like

a community mission where everyone helps others? We all pay into the kitty

and at some point we all benefit from the collective assistance. Should we

draw the line at half is good enough? Why, so others can get half is good

enough too?

I still have not seen any amputees hopping around on one prosthetic leg.

Here is the US government is supposedly " of the people, by the people, for

the people " .

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

Arguing with a fool proves there are two.

& Dreamer Doll ke7nwn

Newport, Oregon

N24C 3G 8/2000 Hookup

rclark0276@...

http://webpages.charter.net/dog_guide/

[Guest guest]

,

I see your comments are directed toward , but posted publicly so I

would like to respond. Years ago, in the late 80's and early 90's, when I

was much younger, I was a disability rights advocate. I fought so that

people with disabilities should have equal access to all the things that

able bodied people have access to. That includes basic ability to live,

breathe, eat, etc., education, employment, and also quality of life

enjoyment - including entertainment, travel, etc. The world around us can

be far more flexible - we cannot just suddenly become able bodied, grow new

legs, arms, ears, eyes. But, we, as a human race, are capable of

manipulating the world around us to make miracles happen. We make deaf

people hear, blind people see, wheelchair bound people walk, and so on. The

barrier to all this, however, is usually money. People with disabilities,

and those with children who have disabilities, are often further burdened

with the cost of caring for themselves and their children. Additionally, for

many, those disabilities become barriers to education, employment and so on.

If our government, which collects taxes and monies to help better the lives

of those it governs has the power to assist those in need as above, then it

has a duty to give everyone the same access to better lives. I am luckily,

in a position, wherein which I do not need governmental assistance to obtain

what I need. However, that was not always the case. In the past I have had

to go to State agencies and ask for help. Part of the reason that I no

longer need governmental assistance, is in part, because they assisted me in

the past, and I was able to better my life, using what I was provided. I

pay taxes. I want my taxes to be used to give to others, not deny.

As someone stated quite succinctly in an earlier post, we are all born with

two legs, two arms, two eye, and two ears for a reason. There is no surplus.

If a person needs two legs, and also need government assistance in obtaining

the two prosthetic legs - trust me, they will get them. It should be the

same for eyes and ears.

Years ago, when I was a little girl, and first diagnosed as HOH (age 4) my

mother submitted to our heath insurance the bill for the hearing aids as

prosthetic devices. The insurance turned her down. She called and inquired

as to why they denied the claim. Their answer? " They only provide

reimbursement for the procurement of prosthetic devices for physical

disabilities! " Of course, my mother did not accept that - she explained

that loss of hearing is also physical - it certainly wasn't mental illness

or imaginary! She won that claim and they paid up. The fact that insurance

companies routinely pay for prosthetic legs or arms and even a portion of

eyeglasses, but not HA's drives me nuts. They base it on the fact that all

people when they get old will most likely need HA's!! But, I have needed

them since age 4! Their logic defies me!

Thank God, I can pay for them.

Ok, climbing off my soapbox now..

Stern

Teaneck, NJ

_____

From: [mailto: ] On Behalf Of

Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 6:40 AM

Subject: Re: Bilateral regrets ?

Hi ,

Long time not Talk, Type,... whatever, sorry I have been absent so

long, work is crazy now for me and free time is scarse...

I don't often disagree with your point of view , but in this

case I am not completely on side with your statement " government

should only pay for one CI so that more can benefit is not

acceptable " I believe the opportunity should be given to as many HOH

persons as possible to get useful hearing restored, which means with

limited funding one per person. I don't believe that should be an

absolute either, there are cases like your good self where bi

laterial implants should be the norm, your limited vision makes it an

entirely different situation. Personally I have said from the start I

would never want a second CI if it meant someone else missing out or

even having to wait longer to get the benefit I have received form my

single device.

I firmly believe there are good reasons for some patients to get

Bilaterial Implants, especially young children and deaf/blind

patients that makes perfect sense. However patients like myself I

classify in the " Nice to have " rather than " Need to have " category.

So from my point of view I will not ever push for another Implant for

myself, not as long as there is a single patient on a waiting list

for a first implant, however I would love to see our Government

approving Bilaterial Implants for those patients I mentioned above

that is a whole different story to me.

BTW for those who don't know me, I am in Canada, and we

have " Socialized medical coverage " so Government pays for our

surgery, device, and Mapping, but they only pay for one. Some

provinces are " experimenting " with Bilaterials for kids, and special

needs - i.e. Deaf Blind which is a great thing, but for someone like

me I do not expect it will change and I am fine with that.

Regards,

Mike " Ears Hopin " P

>

> and Ted,

> I found 's comments interesting and sensible too. As a

deafblind

> person with one CI and one deaf ear, I can attest to the fact that

having a

> half set of working ears is not good enough.

>

> You've all heard the argument, we were born with two ears for a

reason.

> Two ears is not surplus. Two eyes, two arms and hands, two legs.

Surplus?

> No.

>

> The argument that government should only pay for one CI so that

more can

> benefit is not acceptable. If it was, we would see many more

amputees with

> one prosthetic arm or leg.

>

> I cannot go bilateral because government (Medicare) will not

cover the

> 2nd CI. Yet they will cover two prosthetic arms or two prosthetic

legs.

>

> Many who have one CI do just fine. I challenge those to wear

blindfolds

> for a few days and come back and tell me, one CI is just fine.

>

> *---* *---* *---* *---* *---*

> Those who get too big for their britches will be exposed in the end.

> & Dreamer Doll ke7nwn

> Newport, Oregon

> N24C 3G 8/2000 Hookup

> rclark0276@...

> http://webpages. <http://webpages.charter.net/dog_guide/>

charter.net/dog_guide/

>

[Guest guest]

,

Actually, we have the money. Lots of it. Its just being redirected to

an overseas bottomless pit. But never mind the will of the people, the

politicians are bought by special interests and therefore the politicians do

the will of special interests.

Our country is rapidly crumbling underfoot. The infrastructure is

decaying and immensely expensive to repair/.replace. We have the funds.

But they are redirected into bottomless pits that offer no return.

(and that is all I will say because many do not want to hear it. )

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

Facts are meaningless. They can be used to prove anything that's even

remotely true.

--Homer Simpson

& Dreamer Doll ke7nwn

Newport, Oregon

N24C 3G 8/2000 Hookup

rclark0276@...

http://webpages.charter.net/dog_guide/