As the person who literally wrote the book on this topic (deaf children & cochlear implants), I am deeply disappointed in this misleading article that appeared in the @nytimes @nytimeshealth @LCarterLong @DisVisibility nyti.ms/2IKs5Ya
It is an over the top love letter to a technology without any sense of critique or nuance. It presents the CI as always successful (it is not) and doesn't talk about the years of work it takes for children to learn to use it.
In fact, there are well known disparities with CIs with children of color and poor children faring worse with CIs. It is not a panacea that 'fixes' deafness - it is a tool that the most privileged can get the most out of
This is because it requires years of round the clock therapy and auditory training practices to use it. It requires a massive amount of work to maintain the device and make sure it is properly programmed (or mapped)
But more than this, the article characterizes deaf people as against the technology and advocating for sign language only, which is a gross misrepresentation and contributes to perpetuating a false divide between sign and CIs
.@nytimeshealth @nytimes should not publish articles that haven't been adequately researched. i literally wrote the book on this and no one reached out to me. there are lots of deaf adults out there with CIs that would be glad to chime in and temper the enthusiasm
and yes it works for people! and we do not begrudge them! but it is irresponsible to write a piece that's basically an informercial for CI companies & clinics & uses all the sob story narratives of disability/deafness as this thing to beat to convince the reader. GROSS
