The Cochlear Implant Debate - Essay Example

?The Cochlear Implant Debate Cochlear implants have elicited a never-ending debate. The deaf have mixed feelings about the use of the implants. Some deaf people appreciate these implants as they allow better interaction with the mainstream society better and live a normal life. On the other hand, some deaf people feel cochlear implants are politically instigated to end the flourishing deaf culture. They believe that being deaf and staying deaf is a way of accepting the condition. At the same time, the majority of the deaf do not support cochlear implants in children. They believe that clinical trials have gray areas, which should be addressed before the implants are used on children. The varying viewpoints create a tug-of-war. Cochlear implants change the life of the deaf people in the mainstream society, but its gray areas in scientific research and clinical trials raise skepticism and arouse feelings the implants can destroy the deaf culture. The Cochlear Implant Debate Cochlear implants are the best solution for deafness in the current times. They are small electrical devices which in the inner ear. Cochlear implants stimulate the auditory nerves in the inner ear sending signals directly to the brain. According to James and colleagues (2005) and Papsin and Gordon (2007), cochlear implants can help children develop good language skills. They believe that implants at a young age stimulate the cochlear subsequently regaining its functions partially. In fact, cochlear implants preserve function of some ear cells. Gantz and colleagues point out ear preservation improves from 10% to 30% after cochlear implants. The deaf can live a normal life with cochlear implants. They can watch television, make calls and interact with other people freely. The self-esteem of the deaf improves remarkably allowing them to perform better in their school work and jobs. This has changed the lives of many people. Some who have made it to the university point out, they would not have made it that far without the implants (Blume, 2009). A study in an Australian school confirms children with cochlear implants improved in their school exams. They also interacted well with the other children improving their emotional and psychological wellbeing. Punch and Hyde (2011) also found out there was general acceptance of the children who got cochlear implants by other children. People who have experienced what it is to be deaf in a mainstream society appreciate Cochlear implants. Wilson and Dorman (2008) point out the deaf have major challenges communicating to other people. They use the sign language which few people understand the meaning creating large communication barriers. Although cochlear implants improve the lives of many people, some deaf people detest them. The major school of though here is cochlear implant surgery pose major health risks. According to them, the surgery is done around sensitive body organs. Balkany and Gantz confirm cochlear implant surgery is done around major nerves, including those responsible for facial movements. Doctors performing the surgery may tough the nerves inappropriately by accident compromising their function. The face of the person would be inclined towards the side the surgery was done. In addition, the remaining good cells in the ears could be damaged leading to worse deafness or diseases (U.S Food and Drug Administration, 2013). Researchers and surgeons agree cochlear implants surgery risks infectious diseases like pneumococcal meningitis. Risks are high if the patient is not immunized against the pneumococcal bacteria. Children are at higher risks of getting the condition compared to adults. Surgeons are cautioned to know the history of the patient well before starting the surgery. However, surgery cannot be delayed because a patient is not immunized against the pneumococcal bacteria (Medical and Healthcare Products regulatory Agency, 2013). It is worth noting cochlear implant beneficiaries have to live a cautious life. The implants are made of metals, which can set off alarm systems, metal detectors and other security systems embarrassing the beneficiaries. They may even be harassed by security officials thinking they are terrorists who have concealed weapons in the body. Cochlear implants beneficiaries would find a challenge to go to places with the alarm systems. In addition, they have to avoid static electricity, which may damage the cochlear implant and other organs in the ear (U.S Food and Drug Administration, 2013). Another school of though is based on the flourishing deaf culture. Deaf people consider deafness a culture, and some of them find nothing wrong with that. In fact, there are many deaf people who would rather remain deaf and use the sign language than have cochlear implants. Those who believe in deaf culture see the cochlear implants as a threat to it. Paul and Whiteman (2010) claim that Cochlear implants are in the middle of technological miracle for the deaf and a threat to deaf culture. Sparrow (2010) confirms that a section of deaf people claim that the genetic testing is a great threat to the deaf culture and should be well researched. The deaf community has been skeptical about cochlear implants in children. Some feel cochlear implants in children are not well studied and researched and may have adverse consequences on the children. It is claimed there is no evidence showing cochlear implants are safe in children and even adults (Gale, 2010). At the same time, some people feel the children are too young to make their own decisions. The deaf community feels that choosing to have cochlear implants or to remain deaf is a personal choice. As such, parents with deaf children should let them grow until they can make their own decisions regarding that. After all, there are many deaf people who choose to remain deaf without the implants while others choose to have the implants. Equally, the deaf community feels it should be consulted by such parents before they approve the surgery. Not because the parents cannot make choices, but because they need to hear the experiences of deaf people. This is advocated if the parents are hearing but have deaf children. The deaf community thinks some parents rush to have the cochlear implant surgery on their children without enough information on the same (Lantos, 2012). A section of the deaf community feels cochlear implants are advertised to especially hearing parents with deaf children to discriminate against them. However, it is important to note that parents have the right to decide what is best for their children. Parents of deaf children can decide basing on what they believe about the cochlear implants. If they believe the surgery is the best thing for their children, then they should go ahead with it. On the contrary, if they do not believe in it, they should not take their children for the surgery. However, parents are accountable and responsible for the decision they make about cochlear implant surgery on their children (Christiansen & Leigh, 2002). There are several hundreds deaf people who have the cochlear implants because of curiosity. Those born deaf maybe curious what is like to hear and have the cochlear implants. Most of those who undergo the surgery for experimental reasons chose to remain deaf members as Christiansen & Leigh (2002) point out. There are deaf people convinced the introduction of cochlear implants was a political strategy to eradicate the deaf culture. According to them, if all deaf people are treated, then the deaf culture would be eradicated completely, and some people would live in denial. However, scientists and researchers claim that cochlear implants were introduced to make the lives of the deaf, simpler and better (Paul & Whiteman, 2010. P127). As stated above, deaf people have a lot of difficulties communicating with the hearing people. When deaf are communicating among themselves, there are no barriers at all (Grant, 2008). But what happens when they have to interact with the hearing community which is the majority in the population? They can barely communicate and understand each other creating large communication barriers. Deaf people believing in the deaf culture argue that staying deaf and learning ways to communicate with others using the sign language is a sign of acceptance. They go ahead to point out that when a deaf person gets cochlear implants, they are in denial and do not accept their disability. There are mixed reactions among deaf people who have had cochlear implants. A study by BBC News Magazine (2012) indicates the disparities on cochlear implants. It was evident that most people appreciated cochlear implants. They could live like normal people and interact well with them. The people skeptical about cochlear implants were those who never had a chance to have the surgery. It is however known that their view points would change once they had cochlear implants. The cochlear implant debate is a big one and never subsides as Grant (2008) notes. However, the gap between the two opposing sides has been reducing over the decades. More deaf people have chosen to have the cochlear implants. The encouragement that comes with the hearing deaf has inspired more to have the surgery. At the same time, scientific research and medicine have improved remarkably in the last decades reducing the cochlear implants skepticism among the deaf. Conclusion Cochlear implants have been received with mixed reactions among the deaf. While some people appreciate the benefits that come with the surgery, others are skeptical about the procedure. Some deaf people feel that enough scientific research has not been done on the procedure posing serious risks to the deaf people. Other people believe the introduction of the cochlear implants is a great threat to the deaf community. All the reactions to this procedure should be taken with an open mind. None should be ignored, and the deaf should be allowed to make their own choices individually. For the children, the parents have the right to decide on their behalf as they know what is best for their children. The government, scientists and the deaf community should consider approaching the issue together to come up with sustainable solutions for the issues raised. After all, it seems the cochlear implants were introduced with good intentions and have changed the lives of many positively. References Balkany, T & Gantz, B. (2005). Medical and surgical considerations in cochlear implantation. Elsevier, 159. BBC News Magazine. (2012). Deaf debate: Caught between two worlds. BBC. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17039270 Blume, S. (2009). The Artificial Ear: Cochlear Implants and the Culture of Deafness. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press. Christiansen, J & Leigh, I. (2002). Cochlear Implants in Children: Ethics and Choices. Washington D.C: Gallaudet University Press. Gale, E. (2010). Exploring Perspectives on Cochlear Implants and Language Acquisition Within the Deaf Community. Journal of Deaf Studies, 16(1), 121-139. Gantz, B. et al. (2005). Preservation of Hearing in Cochlear Implant Surgery: Advantages of Combined Electrical and Acoustical Speech Processing. The Laryngoscope 115(5), 796-802. Grant, S. (2008). The Silent Debate: The Controversy Over the Cochlear Implant and how it is Changing the Deaf Community. Ann Arbor: ProQuest. James, C. et al. (2005). Preservation of residual hearing with cochlear implantation: How and why? Acta Oto-laryngologica 125(5), 481-491. Lantos, J. (2012). Ethics for the pediatrician: the evolving ethics of cochlear implants in children. Pediatrician Review, 33(7):323-6. Medical and Healthcare Products regulatory Agency. 2013. Cochlear Implants. Retrieved from http://www.mhra.gov.uk/Safetyinformation/Generalsafetyinformationandadvice/Product-specificinformationandadvice/Product-specificinformationandadvice-A-F/Cochlearimplants/ Papsin, B & Gordon, K. (2007). Cochlear implants for children with severe-to-profound hearing loss. New England Journal of Medicine, 357, 2380-2387. Paul, P & Whiteman, G. (2010). Hearing and Deafness. Sudbury: Jones and Bartlett publishers. Punch, R & Hyde, M. Social Participation of Children and Adolescents with Cochlear Implants: A Qualitative Analysis of Parent, Teacher, and Child Interviews. Journal of deaf studies 16(4), 474-493. Sparrow, R. (2010). Implants and ethnocide: learning from the cochlear implant controversy. Disability & Society, 25(4). U.S Food and Drug Administration. 2013. Benefits and Risks of Cochlear Implants. Retrieved from http://www.fda.gov/medicaldevices/productsandmedicalprocedures/implantsandprosthetics/cochlearimplants/ucm062843.htm Wilson, B & Dorman, M. (2008). Cochlear implants: A remarkable past and a brilliant future”. Elsevier. 3 (21). Read More