Over the years through the development of medicine and science we were able to create the cochlear implant, a permanent device, which works around the damaged auditory nerve to send sound signals to the brain; and many within the Hearing community consider this a “cure” for being deaf (ASHA). This leads to several controversies within the Deaf and Hearing communities relating to the use of cochlear implants, which once implanted through brain surgery are permanent and destroys any remaining hearing an individual has. While many within the Deaf community are against the use of cochlear implants, a big issue arises when cochlear implants are implanted on deaf children by hearing parents. As children our parents are trusted as our guardians to make our medical decisions, yet how is the implantation of a irreversible unnecessary device on a child a decision that can be made by a hearing person? This is a decision that should be reserved for the child to make once they’ve reached “adulthood” at age eighteen. 

According to Lindsey Heale, “at least 90 percent of deaf and hard of hearing children are born to hearing parents who usually want their children to be like themselves,” I think that the use of a cochlear implant is an easy fix for what these parents consider to be a disability, instead of making the effort to learn sign language to communicate as well as other methods (Heale). Why should they get to take the easy way out, while complicating their child’s sense of identity? This lack of identity places a child in a liminal state, part of, yet not part of, both the Hearing and Deaf community. These cochlear implants take a child away from the unique culture they were born into and removes the choice of them ever getting to be apart of it, as most of them will never learn how to sign, which is the primary language and form of communication within the Deaf community. 

To really understand this argument you need to understand that a cochlear implant is a device that “replaces the function of the damaged inner ear,” and interacts in replacement of the auditory nerve with the cochlea to create and send sound signals to the brain (ASHA). One portion of the implant is on the outside of the head, behind the ear, the other part of the implant requires surgical implantation, underneath the skin in replacement of the damaged auditory nerve (NIDCD).  To qualify for an implant one must be profoundly deaf, and at least twelve months of age, as well as be open to receiving the implant and want to be part of the Hearing community. Also to hear successfully with an implant one must be prepared for not only brain surgery, but also extensive therapy, and for some speech therapy (NIDCD). 

According to the Baylor college of medicine there are risks to cochlear is that the implantation will “destroy any residual hearing within that ear,” which for those who are profoundly deaf, but still have some hearing, removes the chance of going back and attempting to use a hearing aid instead (BCM.edu). Also in a 2002 study done by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention it was found that children with cochlear implants were at higher risk of getting bacterial meningitis, a disease that is “very serious and can be deadly considering that death can occur within a few hours;” than children without them (CDC). This study was repeated again in 2004 and basically the same results were found. Yet to this day there are “over 70,000 individuals in the United States have received cochlear implants,” and this number continues to grow even with the risk of permanently hearing loss, and for meningitis (NIDCD). Also there was the case of Dr. Lisi, who after implanting a cochlear implant on a 45 year old man, found that the right half of his face was paralyzed, even after 6 months the patient’s face still had not completely regained nerve function (Lisi, 1). And even though this was a rare 1% occurrence, this “complication occurred despite proper operative technique,” and what if that procedure had caused the facial paralysis of a child who hadn’t asked for such a device, yet they still have to suffer the consequences (Lisi, 2). 

Children as young as twelve months can be considered candidates for cochlear implants and ASHA explains that “the younger a child implanted, the greater the benefit achieved in the areas of speech perception and speech and language development,” yet making such a permanent decision at a young age is hard. It is within the first three years of life that the majority of speech and language development takes place, and that is a reason why it is encouraged to have a cochlear implant placed, while a child is younger. As writer Andy Phalen mentions this “can bring a deaf child into the mainstream hearing world, helping them develop speech and improve their lip-reading skills,” it also can “complicate a difficult decision for parents of deaf children (Phalen).” And while the implantation may pull a child from its Deaf culture, it can also open many doors of possibility for them. For people like Ashley Chism, student, it has worked well for her as she mentions how, "I can hear people talk and hear other sounds well,” as well as bringing up the point of how she is “proud that my parents chose this for me (Phalen).” The implant has also caused a drastic change in Chase Crowder, within the two years after getting the implant; he “had gone from almost no talking to constant chatter (Phalen).” For these people cochlear implants have been successful, and has changed the ways these families are able to communicate. Yet at the same time it is taking these children out of the Deaf culture and removing the likelihood of them ever using sign language. 

Within the Deaf community they don’t view themselves as disability, and deafness itself comes in varying degrees of hearing loss and according to Derosia, the “Deaf community has a rich culture, consisting of its own language and social dynamics (Derosia).” Yet even with 1 in 8 people being deaf, American Sign Language is normally only offered as an optional class, that doesn’t fulfill the foreign language requirement (Eisert). American sign language is even currently offered at USC, but without it counting for a foreign language credit, many students will not or can’t fit it into their college schedule. A lack of people learning sign language encourage, Oralism, which is “teaching the deaf to speak as opposed to sign language (Berson).” The AG Bell association’s mission is to attempt to make independence for those who are deaf by combining cochlear implants and programs such as speech therapy, and while this sounds good in theory. I see this as an effort to continue the practice of oralism, which makes things such as learning hard on those in the Deaf community. Deaf people shouldn’t have to spend hours learning to speak and read lips, while being denied the accommodation of sign language and an interpreter.

And while some people like to Occupy Theory mention that the use of a cochlear implant can improve the safety of those with them “by allowing them to be more aware of dangerous situations and hear impending danger situations.” Which I have to agree with this, just think about when you cross the street with headphones and loud music in and how unaware you can be, now imagine that struggle everyday but with everything to traffic to an alarm. 

Cochlear implant are a very expensive upgrade and ASHA reports that a single cochlear implant can cost anywhere between $40,000 and $100,000, they also report them as “consistently ranking among the most cost-effective medical procedures,” which would make sense for those removed from the Deaf culture, because they are a permanent “fix” and take away the need to invest money else where like in ASL classes. Wouldn’t it be easier and more cost effective to just learn to be more aware of ones surroundings? 

As a parent your job is to protect your child and to make sure their needs are met, but when does that give you the right to determine your child needs to be fixed of something that isn’t an illness? You don’t see people attempting to cure down syndrome or autism, instead parents in that position work with their child to learn to communicate and to help them learn how to function, we aim to have them accepted into society and don’t talk about curing them. So why are these considered okay to leave as be, but deafness needs to be fixed? Why is there not a movement to accept the Deaf into the Hearing community? Instead of looking to “cure” a child of something that makes them who they are, lets look more towards accepting them for who they are and helping them find their place in society. America is suppose to be a melting pot of cultures, so lets stop destroying the Deaf culture’s children. 
