Thursday, May 21, 2009

Anti-CI Deafies, This is NOT really a DEFEAT at all!

This is NOT really a DEFEAT at all for us, anti-CI supporters when Governor Doyle recently sign the legislation to require the health insurance companies to cover the expenses of cochlear implant surgery on deaf babies and youngsters. 

The beginning of REAL VICTORIES for the anti-CI deaf supporters on behalf of deaf babies and youngsters which clueless and emotionally vulnerable and idiotic parents do to their offspring without deaf babies and youngsters' own consents. 

That is clearly a HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION of deaf babies and youngsters' right to their own existence without being inflicted to the lifetime pain and sufferings from the questionable cochlear implant surgery. 

Let's look up to the fine example of the so-called medical miracles of the mid-20th century - lobotomy on mentally compromised individuals. The latest formal definition of lobotomy is to be found most real cruel and inhumane method to correct the given human flaws. 

  PBS-TV's "American Experience" have the excellent television documentary on America's real past shame of lobotomy treatments - 

  Governor Doyle and Rep. Cullen's political careers and lifetime futures will be in real smoke before the re-election of 2010. Keep watch out for the upcoming scandals within the Doyle administration and the office of Re. Cullen! 

 NAD is clearly responsible for NOT giving any resources or legal assistance to the deaf activists of Wisconsin! What good NAD is all about??  Should we not renew our NAD membership?? Let it be!

ASLize yours,
Robert L. Mason (RLM)


  1. One state down 4 to go.


  2. Robert,

    All this bill will do is require insurance companies to pay for those who choose to have the CI, or parents who choose to have it performed on thier children.

    To equate it to a human rights violation, or a lobotomy, is a reach, to be blunt. Do I believe that children WHO ARE OLD ENOUGH, should be consulted with by their parents before going forward? YES. But, for children who are too young to understand the ramifications of such a surgery, it is a parent's job to make those decisions, right or wrong.

    It is a Catch-22, because parents must make difficult choices sometimes, but at the same time, CI's are usually (as I understand it) most successful when they occur earlier in life. There are MANY parents of children who have a CI who have also learned, and insisted that their children learn, ASL. They see the CI for what it is... An ASSISTIVE device. It is not a cure-all, but it will, in most cases, help with language development (NOT speech or hearing development only). I think even you would agree, that the earlier a child is exposed to language (irregardless of the type of language), the better.

    Please don't make such emotional and overboard analogies equating a CI to lobotomies, or human rights violations (such as genocide, for example, which is a TRUE rights violation).

    Eddie (ThumpaFlash)

  3. There are times one questions the motivations behind anti-CI stances. I was never convinced the motivation was to preserve child rights as such, but more to preserve deaf culture.

    The basic issue is that it is all based on staying deaf, so there will be those who feel it is too high a price to pay, and remain unconvinced deafness is positive, and here, is an operation that can give an 'out' and enhance a child's advance in the world.

    It is a parental decision at the end of the day, so the anti's have to be very very careful they do not antagonize the parent, we have read attacks on them, and that is a sure fire way to push a parent TO a CI option "Who are these people telling me what to do with my child ?"

    The Anti's have to enlist parental sympathy and support, I don't think parents are brainwashed, I give them more credit, no-one would take any head operation on their child lightly, I wouldn't. I'd need considerable convincing it was valid.

    I think the deaf push to get culture recognized has missed the fact most still see deafness as a very severe communication disability, 2000 plus deaf charities, and £6 billion a year in support here, provide stark testament to this, deafness is a true disability, and an expensive one too.

    It provides a lot of impetus for a parent who wants a better future for their child, than one that is always going to be dependent on someone else.

    Perhaps anti's are not focusing enough on the positive sides, and are failing to show it. Anger and emotion can be seen as frustration AT being deaf, it's all very subtle, and anti-CI campaigns are nothing like subtle. A number gave out false information and that undermined their cause.

    I don't know why CI's are an issue gentics are far more an issue than those. Deafness will be bred out of babies, or the deaf child ID'd and then discarded. Parents may be asked do you want a deaf child or a hearing one, then that is IT for the deaf community.