Darjany 1 Karis Darjany Professor Toungate English 101 29 November 2012 Should Children Be Allowed to Use Cochlear Implants?

Many Deaf culturalists argue against the use of cochlear implants in children believing that they take away the childs right to remain deaf, and a part of Deaf culture; despite the many physical benefits the implant has to offer. They argue deafness as a point of pride in Deaf culture, not a disability. Cochlear implants are then seen as a way of destroying Deaf culture because it shows deafness as something that can be fixed, instead of a way to embrace their differences. Bonnie Poitras Tucker, a deaf proponent for cochlear implants, points out that Deaf people lack one of the five critical senses. (Tucker 7) making them at a disadvantage compared to people who have every sense. Cochlear Implants are a way for deaf people to hear and be on equal communication ground with the hearing world, they offer opportunities that werent available before and help facilitate life experiences; cochlear implants are beneficial. A cochlear implant is a device that uses internal and external devices that work together to allow hearing sensation. There is an external microphone--worn behind the ear--that is able to pick up sounds and send them to a speech processor. The implant takes these signals and uses an array of electrodes to stimulate the fibers of the auditory nerve that allows hearing in the user. The Food and Drug Administration stated that Cochlear implants are designed to help severely to profoundly deaf adults and children who get little or no benefit from hearing aids. Even individuals with severe or profound "nerve deafness" may be able to benefit from cochlear implants. The benefits of cochlear implants are clear; being able to hear in a hearing world is an advantage that researchers and developers have been trying to give deaf people for 40 years.

Darjany 2 Most of the controversy surrounding cochlear implants has to do with the autonomy and rights of a child eligible for cochlear implantation. These children are not able to make decisions about their surgery because they are too young, so the decision is put in the hands of the parents. (Mascia 225) Moreover, the window in which the prelingually deaf child can be implanted is exceedingly small (up to three years). The responsibility of the parent to make the right decision is very hard. As the Vice President for Adult Programs and Audiologist, John Mascia states: Deciding what exactly is in the best interest of a child is a highly subjective task. Both hearing and deaf parents undoubtedly have, as their primary motive, the best interests for their child at heart. By utilizing the existing legal and bioethical frame works to make a decision to proceed with cochlear implantation for a young child leads to the conclusion that parents, rather than any other decision maker, should appropriately assume the principle of true informed decision making responsibility (Mascia 282) With the childs best interest at heart, the parent is expected to make a permanent decision for the child; is there a right answer? Since cochlear implants should be implanted before the child is three, if the parent decides to wait until the child is old enough to communicate their own opinions on cochlear implants, the benefits that might have been gained earlier are virtually nonexistent. To decide if cochlear implants are the correct decision would take many hours of studyingDeciding whether or not to use the implant would take hours upon hours of studying the topic into submission, there are many things to take into account: surgery risks, learning to hear and speak, and opinions from both Deaf and Oral cultures. Ultimately there is no right or wrong answer, only answers that fit best with the morals of the parent. To decide if the deaf child should use cochlear implants,one should take many things into consideration. Mascia has advised parents to ask questions on behalf of their child before any

Darjany 3 final medical decision has been made: are these all of the possible options? What are the risks? How many people have had this operation? What were their outcomes?(Mascia 282) Parents making a decision for their deaf child should ask many questions about all of the possible options, risks and outcomes of this surgery and surgeries in the past and should carefully research cochlear implants for themselves to make an appropriate decision for their deaf child. Research papers on cochlear implants are easy to find, and there is a myriad of sources that have useful information without being biased. Parents doing research for themselves will be better informed and able to decide whether or not to use the cochlear implants Leaders of the National Association for the Deaf have stated in the past that Deaf people like being Deaf, want to be Deaf, and are proud of their Deafness. (Tucker 7) According to this model, Deafness should be viewed as something to take pride in, not something to be fixed. Since the purpose of the cochlear implant is to help deaf people become a closer part of hearing culture, many Deaf people have rejected the implant because it goes against their ideals. In the debate over learning orally and visually, Deaf culturalists believe that American Sign Language should be taught over spoken English because it is easier to learn and provides a word base that can be used later to learn English word order. While spoken English is not encouraged in some circles, written English is. Writing may be an easier form of communicating outside the deaf community. Since cochlear implants help deaf individuals hear, the implants are seen as a way to distance the individual from Deaf culture The hearing community often views cochlear implants as very helpful instruments. Cochlear implants are a way for many deaf people to hear, they can use cochlear implants to enrich their life by listening to music, talking with friends, or playing with their children. When a parent decides to give their deaf child a cochlear implant, they dont make the decision to spite the Deaf

Darjany 4 community as some would believe. In fact, sign language can be learned along with oral language so that the implanted individual can interact with both deaf and speaking people. Since the implant isnt a direct substitution for hearing, implant recipients dont hear the same way as people with 100 percent natural hearing. Therefore, open speech discrimination may prove to be a challenge. . Those who are opposed to cochlear implants would argue that the current cochlear implant technology isnt yet advanced enough to use on. Because implants are actually implanted into the recipients head, they are considered to be too intrusive for use on children. To make a hole big enough for the implant to fit, the surgeon makes a well in the bone of the patients head, just behind the ear. When the implant has been placed, everything is sewn back up and left to heal-with at least six months of recuperation. (FDA) while the cochlear implant can be removed with surgery later in the childs life, the hole in the bone will always be there. Analyzing the benefits along with the losses, however, may show that body alterations connected with cochlear implants are on the path to a desired outcome. While some parents may be disenchanted with the prospect of permanently altering their childs head to accommodate an implant, it should be taken into consideration that the implant will enable that child to hear. The cochlear implant technology of today may be invasive, but the technology of yesterday was even more so. As biotechnology progresses, cochlear implants are only becoming better and better Another argument used against cochlear implants states that the current cochlear implant hasnt advanced enough to be used on children. However, the cochlear implants of today are much better than they have been in the past. In 1970, the device introduced to the market was a single channel cochlear implant called 3M/House cochlear implant which allowed (American Speech Hearing Association). Twelve years later, Cochlear Corporation introduced the first multi

Darjany 5 channeled cochlear implant, Nucleus22 (ASHA). The single channeled implant was no match for the Nucleus22 and was pushed off the market because it hadnt the capacity to rapidly translate spoken language as Nucleus22. During the 1990s and to the present day, cochlear implants were researched to try and refine its design. (ASHA). In past years, researchers have been able to improve the components for cochlear implants to make them more beneficial, Currently there are three FDA approved, multichannel CI systems available within the United States. These include the Nucleus Cochlear Implant System marketed by Cochlear Corporation, the Clarion device marketed by Advanced Bionics Corporation, and the Med-El device marketed by Medical Electronics Corporation. (ASHA) Because implants are actually implanted into the recipients head, they are considered to be too intrusive for use on children. To make a hole big enough for the implant to fit, the surgeon makes a well in the bone of the patients head, just behind the ear. When the implant has been placed, everything is sewn back up and left to heal--with at least six months of recuperation. (FDA) while the cochlear implant can be removed with surgery later in the childs life, the hole in the bone will always be there. Analyzing the benefits along with the losses, however, may show that body alterations connected with cochlear implants are on the path to a desired outcome. While some parents may be disenchanted with the prospect of permanently altering their childs head to accommodate an implant, it should be taken into consideration that the implant will enable that child to hear. The cochlear implant technology of today may be invasive, but the technology of yesterday was even more so. As biotechnology progresses, cochlear implants are only becoming better and better