Would you rather have no hearing or no legs?

[KJbushway]

Its sad that with todays medicine we can't reverse some of these conditions at an early age. Let kids be kids, you know. They shouldn't have to see life through tough eyes when there young.

 

[Trekker4747]

Under much consideration I've decided to go with legs. I'm presuming that it's due to amputation and not paraplegia, as the latter would bring with it other life-shattering problems.

I think losing legs would bring with it the least drastic changes to life and least adaption. Sure, I'd have to learn to better navigate my environment, get to objects out of reach and get my car retrofitted with hand-manipulated brake/gas pedals put everything that comes with that strikes me as easier than having to learn to communicate with people all over again including a whole new language. (Assuming, of course, whatever rendered me deaf would make hearing aids and cochlear implants ineffective) and listening brings with it a lot more enjoyment to the world through just simply watching TV, watching movies and listening to music.

There's plenty of times when I wish I could be deaf or have less perfect hearing (which it is, I hear much higher pitches and lower levels than I should be able to) because when I'm in a noisy place (like a restaurant that has stupidly elected not to put in a sound-dampening ceiling but, instead, left it open to the rafters of the building which creates a lovely echo chamber of noise) or when children are around doing, well, pretty much anything.

Can I lose one leg and lose half of my ability to hear? (That-is, sounds are half as loud/intense as they are now not lose hearing in one ear.)

 

[Finn]

^I wouldn't know. It's not captioned.

My questions aren't captioned? That doesn't make sense.

I'm talking about the video. Like Nerys Ghemor said, it was clearly addresed to me.

No. It is really incredible that you would post that in response to my posts, RJ. A video with no captions, seriously?

You're not the only person here. But if you are interested in the lyrics, here's a link.

No. If I want the lyrics, I'd expect it to be in the video instead of looking it up elsewhere.

Of course it is worse to have disabilities. That's why they call them disabilities.

No. News Flash. I only use the word disabilities because that's how many people unfortunately see it. Many people want their kids to be like them, even little people, the Deaf. I can't say sure about other "disabled" people.

It is disrespectful and rude to imply that people who spend their whole lives living with the inconveniences and overcoming the challenges of having a disability are not doing anything special.

One thing I can't stand is how people marvel at how "disabled" people can do ordinary things, as if they shouldn't be able to do those things. Why?

Guess what? there are blind surgerons, deaf lawyers, actors with down syndrome and university professors with severe neurological disorders. So what? Those "disabilities" has nothing to do with what they can do, and how smart they are.

As a member of the Human race, when I see a blind person, I feel sorry for them, admire them and wonder how I would deal with it if it happened to me; anything less than that is the worst kind of political correctness.

Why? They are normal people. They don't need your pity! If deaf/blind person can get advanced degrees and lead a thriving career, why on Earth would you feel sorry for a blind person who has a normal hearing?

 

[Finn]

As for the thread question, It is very disrespectful and rude to ask such questions. I wouldn't dare ask people to pick between blindness and dwarfism, or between having cerebral palsy and being Dyslexic. It is demeaning because it implies those things are "worse" than having no "disabilities".

Yet your blanket statement doesn't allow for individualism among people with "disabilities" either because you lump them all together. The answer to whether my autistic son's life is worse overall than those of non-disabled, neurotypical children, is "yes". However I'd never presume to apply my son's individual life experiences to any other person with any kind disability, including another autistic child, because every person's experiences are unique to them. In the case of many disabilities it's society that causes the problem, not the disability itself, but either way it's wrong to make any type of blanket statement, be it positive or negative.

I understand why you would see these types of questions as insulting, but I think it's possible to see these questions in a positive light because it helps non-disabled people think about these disabilities and what affects they may have on their lives, thereby increasing their understanding of any obstacles faced by people who have these disabilities, both physical and social. Anything that lessens the social invisibility of people with any kind of disability is a good thing in my view.

Right, it is kind of part of my point about all of this. I remember how when I was in high school, our teacher tried to show us what it would be like to be deaf/blind by blindfolding us and making us walk around the building. Know what the problem was?

My brain wasn't wired as if I was a deaf/blind. For all my brain knew, I was in a dark room, since I'm still a sighted person. I wouldn't dare tell deaf/blind people I have the slightest idea what it would be like to lack both sight and hearing.

As for your autistic son, funny. I marched for Autism Speaks last fall. There was a group there protesting (with hateful remarks unfortunately). They claimed that Autism Speaks treated people with autism as "freaks" and held them back. People are complicated that way.

 

[Finn]

I suspect loss of mobility would be easier to accommodate in my current job than loss of hearing, though realistically I expect I would still end up taking a different position in my company than the one I currently have, because I'm not sure that reasonable accommodations would be possible. They definitely would not be if I lost my hearing given that being able to participate in conference calls and take phone calls is an essential job function.

Realistically, though, I suspect that in the case of hearing loss, I would take a leave of absence and get a cochlear implant. Given that I was born with hearing, that would be restoring part of what I am already used to. I do believe I could live without hearing, but that's probably the course of action I would take. Under either circumstance (whether or not a CI would work on me), I do think I would take great pleasure in taking ASL courses. Loving languages as much as I do, this would give me a challenge to take on during the adapting phase that would give me a sense of purpose. Especially since I would be missing music so badly (yes, there are other ways I could perceive it but I am synesthetic, so what I hear also results in visual stimuli as feeling it would not), giving me something NEW would be very meaningful, since even more than music, language is my greatest love. My thoughts are typically in writing, though, so while I would miss voices, I would not be missing out on reading, or on the opportunity to learn sign (and actually HAVE to practice and spend the time on it, which my lazy self cannot seem to manage at this time between other activities ).

If I lost my legs, I am sure it would be possible to adapt to that. I already happen to live in a one-story house that was made with fairly wide doors. This is in part because my neighborhood attracts a lot of senior citizens, so this was already a consideration in the architecture of the houses. No need to move--the house could be fitted with necessary devices without too much trouble. A definite remodeling job would be needed to get work spaces at the proper level and to make the bathroom usable, but that's all. Not so sure about driving. I could get a car with hand controls, but knowing my pathetic hand-eye coordination, I'm not 100% sure I'd ever get qualified.

As a job in both circumstances I would probably (assuming I couldn't find work in my company) take on something writing-related as a full-time job, be that editing or some sort of work-for-hire (freelance journalism, technical writing, etc.). If I took some refresher courses in Spanish (something I may do anyway once I get into a job that does not require travel), translation work would also be an option. And I see no reason why, assuming I was given written assignments and could do most work via e-mail (though of course relay services exist for the occasional phone call), that I could not be a translator if I were deaf.

Basically, I think I could be happy under both circumstances, though no doubt there would be challenges and difficult emotional periods. Flip a coin--I'll adapt to the result.

Have you done research on CI? I heard that to you guys, the sounds would sound mechanical through the use of CI. I don't know if that would be enough to bother you.

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

I started a thread about this couple and most people thought that the boy should be taken from his parents and given the cochlear implant. In fact, most people thought that the parents were abusive but I tried to understand it from their points of view just like I tried, and succeeded, to see my son's point of view.

I don't think that taking a child from his parents to do that kind of thing would be at all justified. Surgery comes with benefits and with risks, and it is not as if this boy's health is in danger. It's up to the parents to decide if they feel that risk is justified or no, if they feel it will improve their son's quality of life or no.

What I said for what I might do for myself, as an adult who has been born with hearing and would be losing something that I am very accustomed to, would be different from someone who is born a certain way and accustomed to a different experience from the start.

The point: basically, you might benefit more people than just a small subset, when providing accommodations.

Very true. A lot of disabilities are created by inaccessibility and not accommodating physical spaces. My daughter's best friend has achondroplasia (the most common form of dwarfism) and their secondary school had one of the science lab tables lowered so she can access the same equipment and do the same coursework as her classmates. Since the classroom is fully accessible to her there are no disability issues.

Right...in addition, I also think there are times when people with "normal" physical capabilities are able to benefit from some of the accommodations that were originally designed with disabled people in mind. So, many people may end up being helped, including those the designers of said accommodations might not originally have anticipated.

One thing I can't stand is how people marvel at how "disabled" people can do ordinary things, as if they shouldn't be able to do those things. Why?

I can say that for myself I have little sense that people should not be able to do certain things. What I do find very interesting to learn about is the solutions used to accomplish those things, from a practical and technical standpoint. The process of finding and implementing a solution is fascinating in and of itself. The situation that occasions that is not always disability. But sometimes it is.

Writing is like that: getting into a different person's head and trying to see how they accomplish this or that, with their particular personality, skill set, etc. Seeing something innovative, or that didn't occur to me as something I might've thought to do in the same position, is interesting. I guess "How does it work?" and "How would I handle _____ situation I haven't encountered yet?" is my natural response to a lot of things.

Have you done research on CI? I heard that to you guys, the sounds would sound mechanical through the use of CI. I don't know if that would be enough to bother you.

It appears to differ, depending on the person, whether the result is bothersome or not. Synesthesia could also have unforeseen or unusual results (and I could imagine it going either way), and I would want to ask about that first given that I have always used both auditory and visual cortices to hear. Whether that would give me an advantage or a disadvantage, I don't know.

But I have read Rush Limbaugh's descriptions of what he hears and that was something he brought up. I would not expect to make too much sense of music, for instance. But if something happened that caused me to lose all of my hearing, I might look into it in order to restore speech comprehension.

Bear in mind, though...I'm speaking of a medical decision that I would consider as an adult experiencing the loss of something I had been accustomed to all my life, and who has not been a part of Deaf culture. (Hopefully, however, people would put up with the fact that I would still be very inclined to learn sign language, even after having made that choice.)

The situation with children gets a whole lot more complicated and I can see the issue both ways. The only thing I do think I would be decided on, if it were my child, would be that I would want my child to be bilingual. I would raise a hearing child of mine to speak both English and Spanish because I believe it's important, so it would simply entail a change of languages to be taught. As far as how to go about that, I'm sure it would take a lot of work and there are multiple approaches to doing so.

 

[ColeMercury]

I'd much rather lose my legs and keep all my senses.

After my son told me this I read a newspaper article about son profoundly deaf parents who were refusing to let their also profoundly deaf son have a cochlear. The reason for this was that they wanted their son to feel he belonged to the large deaf community that this couple belonged to. They thought that a hearing boy living in that deaf community would find it much harder to cope with than being deaf.

I started a thread about this couple and most people thought that the boy should be taken from his parents and given the cochlear implant. In fact, most people thought that the parents were abusive but I tried to understand it from their points of view just like I tried, and succeeded, to see my son's point of view.

Surely it should be the boy's decision, not the parents'? It's his life, after all. If he's going "I want to be able to hear!" and they're like "No, you're going to grow up deaf and like it!" then that's abusive, but if he's ambivalent or wants to remain deaf then I don't see a problem. And if he's too young to make that decision then it's fine to wait until he is old enough to decide for himself.

One thing I can't stand is how people marvel at how "disabled" people can do ordinary things, as if they shouldn't be able to do those things. Why?

Guess what? there are blind surgerons, deaf lawyers, actors with down syndrome and university professors with severe neurological disorders. So what? Those "disabilities" has nothing to do with what they can do, and how smart they are.

Well, just as an example, take the blind surgeon. I'd have thought that a sense of sight would be necessary if you were slicing into someone and operating inside them. It doesn't apply to all of them (like the deaf lawyer -- a sense of hearing isn't integral to practicing law) but the general reason people marvel at stuff like that is they do expect the disabilities to impact what such people can do.

By the way, why are you putting "disabled" in scare quotes? "Disability" seems like a perfectly suitable word to me -- for example, blind people lack (dis-) the ability to see.

 

[Miss Chicken]

Surely it should be the boy's decision, not the parents'? It's his life, after all. If he's going "I want to be able to hear!" and they're like "No, you're going to grow up deaf and like it!" then that's abusive, but if he's ambivalent or wants to remain deaf then I don't see a problem. And if he's too young to make that decision then it's fine to wait until he is old enough to decide for himself.

It really cannot wait until the child is older because (and I quote from a Wikipedia article but I have also read it in other sources)

Another group of customers are parents of children born deaf who want to ensure that their children grow up with good spoken language skills. Research shows that congenitally deaf children who receive cochlear implants at a young age (less than 2 years) have better success with them than congenitally deaf children who first receive the implants at a later age, though the critical period for utilizing auditory information does not close completely until adolescence. Additionally, a 2010 study into bilateral implantation showed that children who receive their first cochlear implant before the age of 1½ responded well to the second one, even if the second one was implanted as late as 9 years old. In contrast, children who got their implants at age 2½ years or later did not respond as well to the later second implant, regardless of when they received ithttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cochlear_implant#cite_note-SecondImplant-18 One doctor has said "There is a time window during which they can get an implant and learn to speak. From the ages of two to four, that ability diminishes a little bit. And by age nine, there is zero chance that they will learn to speak properly. So it’s really important that they get recognized and evaluated early.

I believe that the boy was already four years old and therefore the passed to optimum time to gain the most benefit. If one waited until he was old enough to make his own decision he would be unable to learn to speak properly.

 

[trekkerguy]

Hearing. Easy. There's so many other forms of communicating and I'd rather have my mobility.

 

[RJDiogenes]

The video is not captioned. I had no trouble understanding that.

Little sarcasm there.

Wow...um...wow. Especially considering you were addressing him directly, and he was the main party you were addressing, that's something I would never, ever have dreamed of saying.

The conversation is between everyone in the Thread. And anybody interested in the lyrics, which in in this song are very clear, can Google them.

I'm talking about the video. Like Nerys Ghemor said, it was clearly addresed to me.

Again, sarcasm. My remarks were clear.

No. If I want the lyrics, I'd expect it to be in the video instead of looking it up elsewhere.

Suit yourself.

No. News Flash. I only use the word disabilities because that's how many people unfortunately see it. Many people want their kids to be like them, even little people, the Deaf. I can't say sure about other "disabled" people.

It doesn't matter if you use the word or not. Reality is reality. Human Beings are very adaptable and can often overcome disabilities and prosper in the face of adversity, but disabled is still disabled. A fully functioning person can walk and see; if someone can't walk or see that means something is broken. It's a very simple concept.

One thing I can't stand is how people marvel at how "disabled" people can do ordinary things, as if they shouldn't be able to do those things. Why?

You can't stand how people appreciate the difficulties that the disabled have to overcome? You have a lot of misplaced hostility.

Guess what? there are blind surgerons, deaf lawyers, actors with down syndrome and university professors with severe neurological disorders. So what? Those "disabilities" has nothing to do with what they can do, and how smart they are.

Nobody said it has anything to do with how smart they are, but it certainly has something to do with what they can do. Disabilities make life more difficult for people. That's why society tries to make extra accommodations for them. Or am I to assume that you "can't stand" all those handicapped ramps?

Why? They are normal people. They don't need your pity! If deaf/blind person can get advanced degrees and lead a thriving career, why on Earth would you feel sorry for a blind person who has a normal hearing?

Because he's fucking blind and I have Human feelings.

 

[ColeMercury]

It really cannot wait until the child is older because (and I quote from a Wikipedia article but I have also read it in other sources)

[...]

I believe that the boy was already four years old and therefore the passed to optimum time to gain the most benefit. If one waited until he was old enough to make his own decision he would be unable to learn to speak properly.

What do you mean by "unable to speak properly", though? Will he have a speech impediment or something?

If it's an "it's now or never" situation then he should get the cochlear implant. And really, I think the parents are being selfish for not letting him have it -- "he won't fit in with our deaf buddies" is a pretty shallow excuse, and it ignores the fact that he may want to go off and live his own life someday.

 

[Mary Ann]

As for your autistic son, funny. I marched for Autism Speaks last fall. There was a group there protesting (with hateful remarks unfortunately). They claimed that Autism Speaks treated people with autism as "freaks" and held them back. People are complicated that way.

Any group which focuses on "treatment" for autism is a write-off in my books, too. Autism Speaks isn't big in the UK, where groups like the National Autistic Society focus on the inclusion and acceptance of autistic people in society through awareness campaigns as well as legislation, and support research into possible genetic causes of the condition. If you wish to view autism as a disease that should be "treated", that's your decision. I prefer to focus on having my son accepted as he is and being treated with the respect he deserves as a whole individual, with gentle support he can cope with from, for example, speech and occupational therapies. His autism affects his life, of course, but his life is not just autism. He's not a freak who needs intensive treatment to better fit the societal norm.

Are you part of the Deaf community? I ask because if you are I find it interesting, to put it mildly, that you may believe that autism deserves to be treated, and thereby that autistic people need to be changed, while Deaf people need no such intervention via, for example, cochlear implants. Why is that?

 

[Finn]

^yep

Yeah, I don't think Autism should be seen as a disease. Same goes for Deafness.

I'm open to CI. But I don't appericate how ignorance can play a role in a child's getting a CI. or worse, more $$ for the doctor (I know of a case where a doctor outright lied to a family.

 

[Mary Ann]

^Fair enough, and I understand what you're saying about CIs (I don't know too much about CIs myself, but can tell you that changing the batteries in one of them caused me to break two fingernails ). As for crooked doctors, there's a special place in hell for them, with a reserved seat for "Dr." Wakefield.

 

[Miss Chicken]

It really cannot wait until the child is older because (and I quote from a Wikipedia article but I have also read it in other sources)

[...]

I believe that the boy was already four years old and therefore the passed to optimum time to gain the most benefit. If one waited until he was old enough to make his own decision he would be unable to learn to speak properly.

What do you mean by "unable to speak properly", though? Will he have a speech impediment or something?

If it's an "it's now or never" situation then he should get the cochlear implant. And really, I think the parents are being selfish for not letting him have it -- "he won't fit in with our deaf buddies" is a pretty shallow excuse, and it ignores the fact that he may want to go off and live his own life someday.

But that might be because you see deafness as being a disability whereas deaf parents living in deaf community might not. Those parents might even see the child with the cochlear implant as the one with the disability, unable to 'feel' music, unable to be accepted fully in their parents' social group etc

Some of the strongest opposition to cochlear implants comes from the deaf community.

 

[Rarewolf]

Easy choice, loose the legs. When I consider the several things going on around me that I can hear - that I naturally take for granted, whilst I just sit here - its not really a choice. The silence would drive me mad quicker than struggle to move.

Hearing vs sight would be a harder choice.

 

[KJbushway]

It doesn't matter if you use the word or not. Reality is reality. Human Beings are very adaptable and can often overcome disabilities and prosper in the face of adversity, but disabled is still disabled. A fully functioning person can walk and see; if someone can't walk or see that means something is broken. It's a very simple concept.

You can't stand how people appreciate the difficulties that the disabled have to overcome? You have a lot of misplaced hostility.

Guess what? there are blind surgerons, deaf lawyers, actors with down syndrome and university professors with severe neurological disorders. So what? Those "disabilities" has nothing to do with what they can do, and how smart they are.

Nobody said it has anything to do with how smart they are, but it certainly has something to do with what they can do. Disabilities make life more difficult for people. That's why society tries to make extra accommodations for them. Or am I to assume that you "can't stand" all those handicapped ramps?

Why? They are normal people. They don't need your pity! If deaf/blind person can get advanced degrees and lead a thriving career, why on Earth would you feel sorry for a blind person who has a normal hearing?

Because he's fucking blind and I have Human feelings

Ok I agree with some of this. Poeple who are different(disabled) they can learn to live a normal life, they may see the world through different eyes(if they are able to). Some people have a natural instinct to feel sorry or even regretfull when they see someone who doesn't have what they have, there is nothing wrong with it. Blind Surgeons, sorry but I would never want a blind surgeon to operate me, but the truth is that I wouldn't trust a regular surgeon either. The professor your talking about is Stephen Hawking? He wasn't always that way, but its also true that he didn't really slow down after that. I tend to not feel sorry for a blind person or the special and handicap. That doesn't make me in-sensitive though, it just means I see that they can choose just as much as anyone else where their life goes.

 

[Nerys Ghemor]

What do you mean by "unable to speak properly", though? Will he have a speech impediment or something?

Often people who cannot hear have a sort of accent. Even adults who lose their hearing later in life may experience a change in the way they speak. However, they can learn to speak in a way that is perfectly understandable just as any accent is. That takes a lot of work, but is perfectly doable if someone wishes to spend the time to do so.

If it's an "it's now or never" situation then he should get the cochlear implant. And really, I think the parents are being selfish for not letting him have it -- "he won't fit in with our deaf buddies" is a pretty shallow excuse, and it ignores the fact that he may want to go off and live his own life someday.

However, the surgery does carry risks, as with any major surgery. We do not know that the parents weren't thinking of that as well. Consider that you are starting with a perfectly healthy child and then deciding to implant a foreign device. It depends on the conclusion the parents come to regarding the potential benefits versus the risks.

I'm open to CI. But I don't appericate how ignorance can play a role in a child's getting a CI. or worse, more $$ for the doctor (I know of a case where a doctor outright lied to a family.

What sort of lie? That does not sound like the considered manner in which such a decision should be made.

I prefer to focus on having my son accepted as he is and being treated with the respect he deserves as a whole individual, with gentle support he can cope with from, for example, speech and occupational therapies. His autism affects his life, of course, but his life is not just autism. He's not a freak who needs intensive treatment to better fit the societal norm.

I think there's a clear difference between giving someone life skills that can help them cope as they are, and treating them as though they have an illness. I have ADHD--and not the "unruly kid" diagnosis...I definitely have difficulties focusing--but my parents refused medication when they saw the effects on me, and instead I went through a lot of therapy to help me develop coping skills. I continue to have to work harder at some things than I think most people would--but I accept that; I do not want to be drugged.

Blind Surgeons, sorry but I would never want a blind surgeon to operate me, but the truth is that I wouldn't trust a regular surgeon either.

I think that the surgeon's record would speak for itself as to whether he, as with any surgeon, is competent and trustworthy. That would be enough for me.

 

[KJbushway]

Anybody being inside of me, just makes me shiver. He could be an excellent surgeon, but I would still shiver.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Are we assuming for the sake of this theoretical argument that one cannot use a wheelchair or prosthetic legs? Both of those are freely available today. It is easier to replace legs than hearing, isn't it? If somebody is born deaf, or loses their hearing, I assume it would be very difficult to operate on them to get the hearing back. But people without legs can use wheelchairs or prostheses.