Schools for the Deaf Embrace Cochlear Implants

One of a Series of Articles on the Awakening Oral Hearing Loss Community

Cochlear implants (CIs) are one of the recent "miracles" that assist people with hearing loss. The original single-channel implants offered extremely limited functionality compared to today's devices; yet they were coveted by some members of the Oral Hearing Loss (OHL) community, because they provided environmental sounds and assisted with speechreading.

Today's implants are technologically and functionally far superior. While not everyone who receives a modern implant is able to talk on the phone and understand speech without speechreading, many are; especially successful are people have relied on (aided or unaided) oral communication for much of their lives, and receive a CI while auditory memories are still fresh.

It may turn out that the true CI miracles are the kids who have been implanted as young as 12 months. We have known for years that language processing begins in the early months of life, and that early exposure to language is crucial to normal development. TA few years ago the FDA approved implantation at 12 months of age, and the first of these early implantees are just becoming of school age. Some are showing remarkable hearing abilities, which can surpass the facility developed by adults. The ability to carry a tune and play a musical instrument is one exciting example.

A recent Wall Street Journal article describes a typical interaction between 4-year-old Kordell Waldner and his teacher. It was an oral interaction in a classroom at the South Dakota School for the Deaf, which is double remarkable. The fact that the Kordell was able (using his CI) to understand oral instructions in a classroom environment is amazing; the fact that it happened in a School for the Deaf is startling.

Those who have followed the CI story for several years are aware of a changing attitude towards the CI by members of the Deaf community. Originally most Deaf folks were strongly opposed to ANY use of the CI. They felt it was something to be discouraged, because it threatened their culture and language.

But after witnessing thousands of success stories among implantees, many members of the community grudgingly acknowledged that CIs did seem to work for people who lost their hearing after becoming fluent in spoken language. But they also correctly pointed out that people who were born deaf or became deaf before learning oral language rarely, if ever, became able to understand spoken language without speechreading. Even so the community eventually came to accept the idea that getting a CI is an individual decision, and many Deaf community members chose to do so.

That still leaves the question of implanting children. For years the Deaf community argued that children should NOT be implanted, that the decision should be delayed until they are adults, when they are able to decide for themselves. I don't think this argument ever carried much weight among the parents of kids with hearing loss, especially in light of the growing medical evidence that speech ability develops sooner and more fully when children are implanted earlier. The Deaf community's argument that people who never developed oral language don't achieve maximum benefit from a CI is the best argument AGAINST waiting to have a child implanted.

Most Deaf organizations today "officially" concede that a child's parents have the right to determine whether or not a child receives a CI. But I continue to see a lot of "unofficial" resistance to the practice of implanting children at younger ages.

This brings us back to Kordell Waldner's story. How is it that a bastion of Deaf culture like the South Dakota School for the Deaf accepts kids with CIs? In the case of that particular school former Superintendent Jon Green decided several years ago to develop a program for kids with cochlear implants. He was met with protests from the some parents of kids then enrolled, and Dr. Green eventually left the school. It's unclear to what extent his unpopular decision contributed to his departure.

Progressive thinking is not the only factor driving this kind of transformation at the Schools for the Deaf. An even larger factor may be economics! The growth of local programs for kids with hearing loss and the technological revolution in hearing loss treatment (including CIs) have led to enrollment declines at many Schools for the Deaf. The declining number of families that choose a "traditional" Deaf education for their children has even led to the closure of deaf schools in Massachusetts, Nebraska, North Carolina and Wyoming.

As enrollment in traditional deaf programs continues to decline, politically astute Deaf community members are becoming more tolerant of oral programs at the Deaf schools. They may not like the trend, but they understand that they really have no alternative. Schools that fail to embrace greater diversity within the hearing loss community will soon follow those in Massachusetts, Nebraska, North Carolina and Wyoming.