What will become of American Sign Language?

Today's story in the Los Angeles Times describes the popularity of cochlear implant surgery for babies and toddlers as soon as they are identified as deaf. Due to advances in newborn screening of hearing disorders and the safety of the surgery, more parents of deaf children are opting to have their children implanted as early as age 1. The swift decision means fewer families and their deaf children are bothering to learn American Sign Language.

That raises a concern over what will happen to sign language in the years ahead. About 400,000 Americans are fluent users of American Sign Language.

Until the past five years or so, cochlear implants were considered risky for young children. Some teachers of the deaf recommended that parents wait and let the child decide whether to get implants or use sign language. But such advice comes with a cost: A child who waits too long to hear might never become proficient in oral language. As scientific evidence accrues that children learn spoken language better if implanted before age 3, the recommendation to wait has faded.

Still, some experts advocate learning sign language even if children receive implants. Learning sign language is a safeguard that allows a young child to develop communication skills prior to receiving the implant. And sign language is there if, for any reason, the implants do not help a child sufficiently.

“We’re trying to impress upon the medical community and on those who are naysayers that you can develop American Sign Language and you can develop spoken language at the same time. The brain has the capacity to do that,” says Debra Nussbaum, coordinator of the cochlear implant education center at Gallaudet University in Washington, D.C., a famous college for deaf people.

“It’s remarkable technology but I do think it’s been overplayed and hyped a little more than it should be for all children,” Nussbaum says of cochlear implants. “The outcomes vary among children. I have seen kids who do great and others who still can’t speak well.”

Audiologists, doctors and teachers agree that the foremost predictor of success is how hard parents, audiologists and educators work with the child to make use of the implants.

“We don’t want to present to parents that [cochlear implants] is a cure,” says Margaret Winter, coordinator of the Children’s Auditory Research and Evaluation Center at the House Ear Institute in Los Angeles, which performed the first pediatric cochlear implant. “We are giving them another avenue to access sound, and what they do with that information depends on many things we don’t understand. We know there is more to it than just putting a cochlear implant in a child.”

-- Shari Roan

Photo: Marieta de Lara adjusts the cochlear implant on her son, Tyler, 3. Credit: Anne Cusack  /  Los Angeles Times

Comments

[D Robertson]

ASL is great to learn in addition to Cochlear Implants - especially for those times when the CI must come off. Middle of the night, illnesses (especially hospitalizations), swimming, broken equipment, etc. My young nephew just used sign language to communicate after having his tonsils out - yes, he could hear, but his knowledge of sign enabled him to communicate his needs without hurting his throat. Why not have both methods of communication?

[Kristina]

People also should know that 1) having the surgery to put in cochlear implants destroys any hearing the person does have and 2) cochlear implants do not work for all kinds of hearing loss.

[anti_audist]

I teach deaf and hard of hearing students. Some have cochlear implants. My biggest concerns? 1) they become DEAFER. It is technology that helps them hear some things but not with clarity. 2) Their language acquisitions is grossly impeded by the lack of or weak language input. Hence they cannot discuss meaningful contents. This leads to poor reading and writing skills. I came from John Tracy Clinic. I am considered a 'success' model for JTC. After learning ASL, I realized what I was missing. Success should not be defined by outward appearance but by the meat of the content. My parents regret not learning and using ASL to communicate with me. Pls...listen to the deaf who have gone through the pain. Do not listen to the medical organizations who stand to make billions of dollars. Taxpayers should also not be labored to foot this ridiculous procedure without addressing language acquisition.

[Amy]

"Anti_audist" doesn't know what he or she is talking about, and their experience decades ago taints their ability to see the possibilities and realities for today's deaf generation. My two sons were implanted at 6 months and 9 months of age. They were speaking and hearing easily by 2 years of age, graduating from Auditory Verbal Therapy. It was not a struggle. They hear 99.9% of the time-- except when they are in the tub, basically. They are not "deafer"-- they hear far better than my father who is 65 and has moderate hearing loss. They talk on the phone. They love to watch TV and my 8 year old never wants to use captions. People have no idea that they were born deaf.

Why would we learn ASL? First, we spent the bulk of our time making sure that our kids learned OUR language-- the one that their teachers, doctors, friends, neighbors and grandparents spoke. The studies show that parents who learn ASL never reach more than an avg. of preschool level, so they cannot speak in complex or meaningful ways as their kids grow. Our kids are exceeding the language of their peers because we spent time reading, listening and enjoying a shared language. There is evidence suggesting that the brain is maleable only at a young age, and that using a visual language can cause rewiring of the neural pathways of a child's brain-- and that becomes irrevocable. I have no doubt that a few sign words in a hearing child (the "Babysign" craze) won't hamper language; I know that the same does not hold true for a child who didn't hear for the first 6-9 months of life.

I can proudly say that what we did work, and my kids are finished products. They live as hearing kids. And they are happy, mainstreamed, social, well-adjusted and healthy. My 8 year old tests at 98% hearing in the soundbooth. You can't argue with that. The testing is not just beeps-- it is random word and sentence tests. So, pretty complex, complete language.

[anti_audist]

In response to Amy who posted her comment on August 4, 2009. I was talking about my students (young, get it??) Just as I was passed off as "successful" by the JTC, so are many being passed off as "successful" CI models. I have seen far too many of these students who have failed! Don't tell me I don't know what I'm talking about. With ASL, the access to content is deepened and widened. With CI, access is limited. Why would anyone limit a deaf child's potential with these ugly devices?? (It is ugly...sorry to be so blunt, but it uglifies the whole child if you think about it). You probably considered your children successful because they are better than they were...wait...you never gave the children a chance. Shame that you limited your children...shame! One day, they will pick up ASL and wonder why they didn't learn it before.

[Diana Ramsey]

ASL is a beautiful complex language that can be learned by deaf and hearing alike, at any age. I am living proof of that. I was born hard of hearing , went to a hearing school , learned to read , write and speak English well but was not given the opportunity to learn ASL. Even though I am not profound deaf I do wish I had been exposed to ASL in my youth along with English. Humans have the ability to be bi-lingal , tri-lingal etc. Learning multiple languages at the same time is accomplished by many children in other countries. American children , hearing and deaf , are far behind other countries in the language field in comparison. Our brains are able to handle far more than what any of us are exposed to in our life time. So despite my lack of exposure to ASL in my youth I started learning ASL in my late 30's. I absolutely love it ! My adult brain may not be young anymore but it is very capable !
I have not only learned a 2nd language I have learned more about myself in the process and about the rich history and culture of the Deaf Community, a community that I am very proud to be a part of now. I think it is sad that many children deaf , hard of hearing , hearing are sold short by not having the opportunity to be exposed to other languages , cultures and the people there of.
Don't sell your children short , keep all doors open , allow them the opportunity to see , taste and experience the richness of all languages including ASL.
They can handle it !

[Melissa]

Like Amy, I also have two children with bilateral cochlear implants whom I raised with the Auditory-Verbal approach and without ASL. My older daughter received her first CI in 1989 as part of the then FDA clinical trials, and my younger daughter received hers in 1996. My daughters are now ages 22 and 14, and they will be the first ones to tell you that they are very grateful for the decisions my husband and I made for them when they were too young to decide for themselves. They consider themselves successes. These successes entail living their lives fully in the mainstream. Their cell phones are as much a part of their lives as for others their ages. My older daughter is fluent in French and has started learning Spanish. When she was a senior in high school, she won a spoken foreign language competition.

My daughters are not exceptions any more than Amy's sons are. Check out the videos and stories on my older daughter's website, www.cochlearimplantonline.com, to hear from many other kids and teens who are thriving with CIs in the mainstream without ASL. Early cochlear implantation combined with the proper follow-up therapy allows the vast majority of children born deaf today to lead their lives happily and successfully in the mainstream. To me, this is no small gift. To be able to hear and communicate easily with the majority expands a child's opportunities both socially and academically. Can deaf people lead successful lives with ASL and without hearing? Certainly, but to me and to most hearing people who know what sound and hearing are, life is better and richer with what the ability to hear well adds to it.

[Amy]

Anti_audist is typical of Deaf Culture extremists. Note that she called my children "ugly!" That shows her true colors.

I am talking about YOUNG children, too. Mine with implants are 3 and 8. I am not ashamed that they go to movies and understand the plot, speak and listen to books read by their grandparents, play with the neighbor kids, and can talk to anyone they meet in the grocery store. They don't need ASL "access" because they have a full understanding of English, their native language. They hear just fine.

You're living in the past-- the angst of your own childhood doesn't need to taint your view of my children. They aren't ugly-- they are beautiful. They also wear glasses, and those aren't ugly, either. Watch your language-- these are the kinds of comments that send hearing parents running madly away from any interest in "Deaf Culture."

[Susan W.]

Your article on cochlear implants is a must-read for parents and educators everywhere (Cochlear Implants, August 3rd ). As a parent of a child with bilateral implants, I’ve seen the miracle first hand of what this amazing technology can offer a profoundly deaf child. My little boy came to John Tracy Clinic at age two with no spoken language. I wondered if he’d ever say “Mommy.” Now, he reads and writes above grade level, plays baseball, talks on the phone and goes to school with his hearing friends. With parental commitment and professional guidance, children with hearing loss can be part of the hearing and speaking world as never before.

[Deep Ears]

Amy, don't believe everything you read. Saying that someone becomes "deafer," in the negative sense, is probably something that a culturally Deaf person would NOT say, so there is every chance that "anti_audist" is a ringer who is not deaf, and is not culturally Deaf, and is engaged in deliberately deceiving the readers of this thread.

Cuturally Deaf people have no problem is accepting *particular individuals* who use cochlear implants, while at the same time being critical of c.i. technology and its improper use. After all, the President of the California Association of the Deaf uses a cochlear implant, even though most members of the California Association of the Deaf are critical, on the whole, of c.i. technology itself. Also, the chair of the current search committee for the next President at Gallaudet has a c.i., and the Gallaudet community has not objected to that.

[Tracy]

This is in response to a comment about the implant destroying any residual hearing.
Not true. The elctrodes lay in the fluid base part of your ear. they take the space where the little hairs lie( that pass the sounds along to the brain), If future tecnology ( stem cell) comes along and one wanted the implant out, they simply Remove it. the space can resume picking up sounds like before the implant.

[Victoria]

I belive that ASL is usefulll and a beautiful language to learn, and I do not like the fact that people are limiting there children out of lazyness. There is no reason to not learn ASL and spoken english. We as humanse are capable of both and should learn both; with the CI's or with out. The deaf culture is wonderfull and there is no reason that being deaf should be seen as a handycap because others decide that knowing spoken english is bettter or that its the only way to life a full and happy life, that view is close minded and selfish because they choose not to change or seen there children as diffrent. All children should get the chance to learn multiple languages and culters, then our world will not be so full of hate and judgment.

[Melissa Kershman Chaikof]

Victoria,

As an Auditory-Verbal parent who intentionally chose not to teach my children sign while they were learning spoken language, I greatly object to your statement, "people are limiting there children out of lazyness." It is assumptions like this that perpetuate the battle lines between those in the deaf culture and hearing parents. You have no idea the time and effort I put into my girls while they were growing up to ensure that they had full access to language, which, in their case, meant spoken language. Nor do you understand that the focus on their spoken language was made out of love and my decision as a parent as to what I thought and still believe was in their best interest. I think that you need to thoroughly educate yourself on what the Auditory-Verbal approach is and why it does not include sign before you write your opinions on the subject.

By the way, I totally agree with you that all deaf children should have the opportunity to learn other languages and cultures. My older daughter would totally agree with you as well as she is fluent in French and has lived for months at a time in France experiencing the French culture firsthand. She is now learning Spanish and spent a month immersed in the language and culture of Peru. It is because she can hear and speak that these opportunities to learn a second and now third spoken language and live and communicate with a family in another country were open to her.

[Rochelle]

I would like to give a different point of view. I am a mother of four hearing children, they all know how to sign. It was my love of the language that made me see not only the beauty, but also the benefits of knowing a visual language. Unfortunately, I see so much back and forth, that it really isn't showing how much you all love the children involved.

I can't imagine what it would be like to have a deaf child, and to have to decide such a huge part of their life so early. I commend every parent for trying, however, every situation is different, and every child also different. The truth is everyone of you sound like you are defending your point of view, and that is fine, after all this is America. I realize that if I don't teach my children to look at someone differently because of the way they look or talk, then I have done my job to raise my children for the America I want for their future. We pass on our views, our miss trust, our prejudice.

When truly the most important view is that of the child.

When my hearing children are playing with deaf children nobody is missing out, I purposely taught my children sign language so that they could communicate with hearing and deaf alike.

Trust me I've heard both sides, and have seen both sides, my heart goes out to all of you. All I'm asking is that each side keeps an open mind, don't rule out either option. In all honesty there are other forms languages and many coutries have their own sign language. America should know better when it comes to languages considering how many are spoken here everyday. It is a pity we are so incapable of seeing anything other than what we set before us, and our children.

[Melissa]

Rochelle,
I would suggest that you have no idea what it's like to have a deaf child. It's all well and good that you have 4 hearing children whom you taught to sign so that the could communicate with deaf children. However, your children have normal hearing, and so it's a far different story. I was faced with an opposite decision, wanting my child to be able to communicate with the world at large. I did extensive research and found that teaching a deaf child sign can result in the permanent rewiring of the neural pathways so that my child's ability to master hearing and spoken language would have suffered.

I am not "incapable of seeing anything other than what we set before us, and our children." That statement smacks of a holier than thou attitude from someone who has never been in my shoes. You have not lived my life nor the lives of the other parents who wrote in. Thus, you have no clue the efforts that went into our making an educated decision, the time and effort, not to mention dollars, that went into ensuring that our children had full access to and attained full mastery of spoken English.

Until you have worn someone else's shoes, it's best not to pass judgment.

[MJ]

We started off learning ASL to help our daughter, but the more we were exposed to the Deaf community, the quicker we got scared away. By the time she reached 20 months we had seen enough and quit all of our ASL classes.

I'm proud to say our daughter is now a very oral child. In addition we discovered and very quickly cued speech, which provides us with a visual system to communicate in the ENGLISH language.

[Beth Rivers]

Dear melissa,
wow, your comments toward Rochelle stank of bitterness and hard heart. I didnt sense one bit of judgement, only selflessness and love toward others ... you of all people should appreciate this.

Thank you Rochelle!! for your understanding and kindness! What an amazing gift you've given your children, to communicate with other children that are different than themselves! Just like the amazing gift of hearing youve given your girls melissa. Both languages are special.

Rochelle is right... maybe if we stop being on the defense all the time we could appreciate others more, it sure does bring more joy to our lives!

[Melissa]

This article says it all about the future of children born deaf and deaf education:

http://www.thetimes.co.za/PrintEdition/Insight/Article.aspx?id=1053524

A partial quote:

What is needed is an interactive approach that helps each child to develop spoken language: this then lays the foundation for skill in reading, which leads, therefore, to academic attainment.

In addition, the number of people who understand and use sign language efficiently is very small, and so those comfortable only in sign language are socially isolated and dependent on deaf culture.

It’s claimed by some that sign language is the generic language of a deaf child.

This is totally false.

The generic language of any child is the language of the home, and only 3% of all deaf children have two signing deaf parents.

It is therefore clear that spoken language is the way forward.

The answer lies in the environment in which the deaf child develops and is educated.

Parents need help in the early stages of a child’s development. They need to learn how to manage their child’s hearing and, at the same time, learn how to interact with their child in spoken language.

[Parpar]

As much as oralists and CI evangelists like Amy, MJ, and Melissa Chaikof would like to see sign language and its users disappear, I assure you that it's not going to happen.

I've studied the AVT Website and cannot imagine why any parent of a deaf child would choose this grueling, unnatural way to acquire language—and say they're doing it out of love! It's bad pedagogy. Learning should be a multisensory activity, not a unisensory one. A deaf child needs an enriched visual mode of learning. AVT is touted as being "progressive," but I don't see much difference between it and the bad old days of the oralist regime when deaf children had their hands tied behind their backs.

The allegation that signing "socially isolates" us is false stereotyping. So is the claim that only deaf persons who learn to hear (artificially) and speak are able to live rich, full lives. I suggest you check the www.DeafPeople.com galleries of historical and contemporary achievers. These are just an incomplete sampling, but they represent successful deaf people in a broad variety of endeavors—both signing and oral-deaf—and none of them had pediatric implants.

As for the South Africa "Times" editorial that Ms. Chaikof gleefully quotes as "[saying] it all about the future of children born deaf and deaf education," I find it no more than a superficial, one-sided puff piece for oralism. It rehashes the same old stereotypes, the same old stereotypical "sign-language-is-a-crutch" thinking. It's regressive, not progressive.

CI evangelists love to tout their children's spectacular success in the "real" world, claiming that they're not exceptions, they're the norm. Unmentioned are the CI failures—the children who fail to acquire language through strict oralism, the ones for whom the CI simply doesn't work. For every CI success there may be ten or more failures. Why don't we hear about them? We know they're there. But their parents don't go around parading them to legislators, giving interviews, and boasting about them every time the topic is broached online.

For a corrective view of the CI craze, see www.CochlearWar.com.

Ever hear of Hypatia Boyd Reed? She had a strict-oral education. She even wrote and published a biography of her German-born teacher, Paul Binner. She became a journalist, married a signing Deaf man, Charles Read, learned to sign, and joined the Deaf community. That is what I wish for Rachel, Jessica, and the children of Amy and MJ and the others like them. As much as you try to make certain that your "finished products" imbibe your own anti-Deaf prejudices, there's always a possibility that this scheme will backfire. Once oral-deaf teens and adults discover the riches of the Deaf community, they often want this for themselves. The Deaf community, contrary to the stereotypical view, is diverse and inclusive. And people with CIs, even the children of implant evangelists, are welcome.

[Amy]

Parpar,

No one is disputing the cultural heritage that deaf individuals have had over the last few centuries. I have no doubt that there have been supportive groups formed to enjoy the arts and lives of those who share ASL.

BUT-- how many people, on a daily basis, come across people communicating with ASL? I personally can go weeks without seeing them. I pass through grocery stores, banks, schools, churches, and parks without ever coming across a single soul who uses it. Call it culture, call it beautiful, but if one is isolated-- and one is isolated-- by using a language not commonly used by those in most places of the world, then what good is it? Better than nothing. That's the point. That's what it was for; it was developed out of necessity because there was nothing better. There was no way to restore hearing or allow for speech understanding.

I just laugh when I think of my children's speech learning as "grueling." It was nothing of the sort. They are all finished with Auditory Verbal Therapy, and my youngest has been finished for over a year. He's 3. He learned to speak and caught up with his peers in a matter of months. Grueling speech training took place in the days BEFORE cochlear implants; today's implanted child, when implanted in infancy as mine were, can be caught up before they attend preschool.

Tomorrow, my 3 year old starts preschool. He has already visited, spoken with his teachers, and played on the playground. He will understand the stories read to him, play house with the classmates, and sing songs. He has no IEP, no speech classes, no interpreters, no captioning.

I don't need to evangelize with most people I meet-- they are instant converts. A way of life that allows for normal communication with all of society is always an obvious benefit. I have heard people say "that is amazing" and "what a blessing" and "wow, I can't believe he was deaf" a million times. Those are true believers... the ones who meet my kids and see that they are beautiful and that they don't need ASL to be special. They become devout missionaries, immediately.

No one criticizes those adults who use and have used ASL. It's too bad the naysayers can't see past their own angst to be positive about the good things our kids are experiencing. As for people who haven't even experienced having a deaf child, like Rochelle, it's ludicrous! We are thinking about the child-- in fact, the child is supreme in this decision. We have to ignore all the pamphlets and "professionals" who go on ad nauseum about the beauty of ASL, forgetting that the beautiful thing is a parent who communicates without barrier to their child, or a teacher whose lesson is taught unhindered. We focus on the benefits to our child, not a culture belonging primarily to the past.

Those who have the power to institute change are making the decisions. I hear from parents almost daily who are making the choice which will forever allow their child to hear and speak! Fortunately, it is the rare bird who decides to stumble along, learning a new language and teach it at the same time, who seeks out the rare ASL using child to be the appointed friend, or who finds a signing classroom in some faraway region which will allow their child to live in an ASL bubble. Eventually, though, they either struggle to communicate in higher education and the workplace, or live on the public dole. Giving kids CIs allows them to succeed, have higher self-esteem (based on a study in a peer-reviewed journal), and navigate the world as hearing rather than handicapped.

[Melissa]

Parpar,

Why don't you identify yourself by name? Are you hiding behind an alias for a reason?

Why do you want Rachel, Jessica, et. al. to join the deaf culture and learn to sign? Why is it so important to you? Can you not accept that there are many deaf persons who choose to live their lives fully in the hearing world and are happy doing so? I have several adult friends who do not even hear as well as my girls do, and yet they have chosen to live their lives fully in the hearing world and to not participate in the deaf culture or learn ASL. I know a few who started learning ASL, interacted with the signing deaf community, said, "This isn't for me," and went back to living their lives without it. If the deaf culture is right for you and if you feel you need it, then fine. No one is stopping you or telling you you're wrong. Deaf people are individuals. They share a loss of functioning of their ears, but that is about all they are automatically born sharing. Many will not be better off or happier learning to sign or living their lives as you have chosen to live yours. One can only assume that your anger stems from your insecurity over the dwindling numbers in the deaf culture as a result of the ever increasing tide of children with cochlear implants who are not following your path.

[Rachel]

"Ever hear of Hypatia Boyd Reed? She had a strict-oral education. She even wrote and published a biography of her German-born teacher, Paul Binner. She became a journalist, married a signing Deaf man, Charles Read, learned to sign, and joined the Deaf community. That is what I wish for Rachel, Jessica, and the children of Amy and MJ and the others like them."

In these days, I normally don't like to get into debates about deaf-related issues as it takes away my time from my busy life; however, because my mom alerted me about Parpar mentioning my name, I feel the need to speak up about Parpar's comment.

No one should have the right to tell others how they should lead their own lives. I'm a 22 year-old adult who was born profoundly deaf and learned to hear and speak utilizing the Auditory Verbal approach. I am extremely grateful for my parents' decision as I'm very happy with my life. I absolutely do not want to have anything to do with the deaf culture as I find many of those extremists to be immature, and I have been mistreated by many of them which included a threatening e-mail which was reported to the police. Please excuse me for being blunt, but that is truly how I feel.

[Parpar]

I like using a screen name—and why shouldn't I take advantage of it just like Amy does? I don't see anyone needling her to reveal her true identity. I have nothing to hide. I'm not a blogger.

I note: you still say nothing about the cochlear-implant failures. Nothing about those who have gone through the surgery and all, and find that they still can't use the telephone. Nothing about he children who fail to thrive.

As for your allegation that the number of signers is dwindling (and where do you get your figures?), I don't see it that way at all. Our day is not past; we're in the present and we have a right to the future, too. We're not relics or Luddites. Interest in ASL is growing. I believe that many of these children with cochlear implants will ultimately find their way to the Deaf community. Why? You might try asking some of those who've done so. And those who have turned off their implants permanently and chosen to learn ASL.

One generation, two generations ago, the doctors and audiologists were assuring parents that hearing aids would give deaf kids normal or near-normal hearing and speech, that they would have absolutely no need for ASL anymore, that they would be functionally hearing or, at worst, hard-of-hearing. It didn't work out that way.

By the way, I'm severely/profoundly deaf. I grew up in the "hearing world," and I know very well what it's like. I tried very hard to fit into that "world," and only began to experience wholeness and happiness when I acknowledged my Deaf identity.

Of course, we're all individuals. I see the current brouhaha over pediatric implants as the manifestation of an old issue: do we decide for ourselves, or do we let hearing people, whether audiologists, teachers, surgeons, or parents, decide for us? At what point do we have the right to decide?

I will say this again: the ability to hear (bionically enhanced) and speak "normally" are not prerequisites for living a full, rich, rewarding life. Deaf people have fought many battles and struggled mightily to be accepted as they are. I don't see how implants have improved public attitudes at all. Now we're told to get ourselves fixed.

I have no intention of telling anyone how to live their lives. I deeply resent the implication that I'm isolated and handicapped because I love ASL, that I'm a relic of the past, that I'm part of a dying culture (that's what antisemites said about Yiddish culture too), that I'm not worth communicating with, etcetera, etcetera.

Rachel, you have every right to reject the Deaf community and those you perceive as "extremists." That's your prerogative. I know that some of them have given you a hard time. There are a number of Deaf folks I wouldn't want to associate with, either. Just wondering . . . should our paths ever cross, and should we decide to establish communication, how would we communicate?

[Nancy Louise]

As an implant user, a parent, a teacher, and active member of the Deaf Culture community, I like to put in my two cents. From what I have read of the Parents here, your language shows you are well educated, probably come from higher incomes, and are very active in the well being of your children. You are also in the minority. A large number of deaf children are not born of such Parents who are able and willing to invest large amounts of time with a child.

It is mostly for those children, that there should be access to ASL so they have all access to communications available. Also the human brain always alters its neural pathways to gain information. This does not mean that learning sign language will block certain auditoral neurology as well. This is misleading. If nothing else, learning more language will enhance the child's ablity to learn by either auditory or visual. There is no need to channel only one access to communications.

I too can understand in the grocery store and many other places with my C.I. but I still enjoy greatly the joy of ASL. There is no one right way or many wrong ways. There are instead, alternate paths to what is right for various demographics. Please do keep in mind the majority of children now born deaf are most likely to poor, less educated, or pro-active families.

[Margaret]

Amy-
Having a Cochlear Implant does not work for every Deaf person. It may aide them in hearing, but the majority of the Deaf community frowns upon having these implants. I have noticed, within the Deaf community, that those who do have the Cochlear Implant STILL USE ASL or Signed Exact English. The parents of the Deaf children, I've also noticed, regret learning ASL later in life, because surprise, surprise, their child who has a CI more than likely will want to start signing. This is why Deaf people do not like hearing people that much, because they are going to feel oppressed, and that's what you're doing with your child and not teaching them a second language. Just wait until your 8 year old wants to start signing instead of listening to you.