However, in May 1988, National Institute of Health (NIH) convened a Consensus Development Conference, discussing some of the questions addressing the cochlear implants (Spencer 32). One of the questions addressed to the implants was: how effective are cochlear implants? The conference statement pointed out that with the implants, “some communicate face-to-face with comparative ease, and even a few can carry on normal conversation without lip-reading” (NIH). The 1988 consensus statement also suggested that multichannel implants were likely to be more effective, at least in terms of speech recognition, than single-channel implants (Spencer 34), allowing candidates to prefer multichannel rather than single channel implants.

In 1979 Graeme was able to design a “Nucleus Multi-Channel Implantable Hearing Prosthesis” (Steven 24). The device consisted of three components: a twenty-two channel implant, a speech processor, and a diagnostic and programming computer system (24). Despite all the oppositions, the successful studies done throughout the seventies allowed the cochlear implant to be recognized by research community and both hearing and deaf society, thereby increasing the numbers of implants with wide range of devices and techniques.

Now let’s look at a solution that might solve the controversial issue of cochlear implants in deaf children and adults. Instead of debating over whether or not cochlear implants destroy the deaf culture or American Sign Language (ASL), we all should realize that ASL is like a bridge which is crossing from the sing language to the spoken language, English. Any qualified candidates who try to adjust to the hearing world by adapting implant can also acquire ASL in order to associate with deaf fellows and be able to function in deaf culture. Before they efficiently acquire the spoken language through the implants, ASL is the only language that can help to function during the transition from two different worlds or languages. Therefore, the solution that I am proposing to the Nation Institute of Health (NIH) is that to include the ASL as a supplemental plan in the cochlear implantation program.

Of course, the controversy over cochlear implants did not develop over night. The very first attempt of stimulating auditory nerves through the electrodes was performed by Volta in 200 years ago, the 18th century (15). However, the first modern attempt at electrical stimulation had not been occurred until late 1950s. In 1957 in Paris, French otologist Charles Eyries and his colleague A. Djourno performed a surgery in which the auditory nerves in the cochlear were electrically stimulated by implanting the electrodes on a deaf man (15). Cochlear is the snail-shaped coil in the inner part of the a ear which includes the site where “the sound receptors transform mechanical vibrations into nerve impulses (Graaff 521). After subsequent electrical stimulation, the patient reported hearing of a few different sounds, noises, and some common words (16). Eyries and Djourno’s successful attempt of stimulating cochlear nerves by electrical circuit was “the first crude use of cochlear implants” and promoted the development of advanced researches on the implants in the following years (Issues and Controversies) and became the very first step of study of cochlear implants today.

According to Fernandes, from the Laurent Clerc National Deaf Education Center, the best way to give the child access to complete language is through ASL, because it is visual and continues to use it to bridge to English after the implants (Issues and Controversies). Agreeing that ASL will survive cochlear implants, Fernandes points out that deaf people will decide how to use implants to help them as a tool, but implants are not going to take us over as a people (Issues and Controversies). Furthermore, cochlear implants are not meant to destroy or bring any negative effect to both hearing and silent world. Rather, they

Some topics in this essay:
Issues Controversies, Controversies Furthermore, Language ASL, Controversies Yes, Development Conference, Fee Goode, Control Prevention, Graeme Clark, According Clark, Agreeing Chouard, cochlear implants, deaf culture, issues controversies, deaf people, cochlear implant, deaf children, hearing world, implant children, sign language, deaf children adults, children adults, sign language asl, american sign language, asl deaf culture, implants alter destroy,