Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Choosing for the child with cochlear implants: a note of precaution

  • Scientific Contribution
  • Published:
Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Recent contributions to discussions on paediatric cochlear implantation in Norway indicate two mutually exclusive doctrines prescribing the best course of post-operative support for a child with cochlear implants; bilingually with sign language and spoken language simultaneously or primarily monolingually with speech only. This conflict constitutes an ethical problem for parents responsible for choosing between one of the two alternatives. This article puts forth the precautionary principle as a possible solution to this problem. Although scientific uncertainty exists in the case of both doctrines, there exists a scenario of possible irreversible harm to some of the children habilitated monolingually. An application of the precautionary principle may hence suggest that it is rational to agree on the bilingual approach, at least for the time-being.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. I follow the custom of differentiating between the medical condition of being deaf (which is written with a lowercase ‘d’) and being a member of a signing community (which is written Deaf, with a capital ‘D’) (Padden and Humphries 1988).

  2. American Sign Language, author’s remark.

  3. Peterson holds that in order for the precautionary principle to be applied as a decisional rule, it must be logically consistent with other established decisional rules. Conducting an investigation of the logical premises for these different rules, he concludes that the precautionary principle can not consistently exist as a decisional rule together with the rule of maximizing expected utility, for example.

  4. It might be added that this is a rational thing to do also since the children themselves have not consented to treatment involving an unquantifiable chance of being harmed.

References

  • Ahlgren, I., and K. Hyltenstam. 1994. Bilingualism in deaf education. Hamburg: Signum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Archbold, S.M., T.P. Nikolopoulos, M. Tait, G.M. O’Donoghue, M.E. Lutman, and S. Gregory. 2000. Approach to communication, speech perception and intelligibility after paediatric cochlear implantation. British Journal of Audiology 34: 257–264.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Archbold, S., and G.M. O’Donoghue. 2009. Education and childhood deafness: changing choices and new challenges. In Cochlear implants: principles & practices, ed. J.K. Niparko, 313–321. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, D.F., M.A. Karchmer, and J.V. Van Cleve. 2002. The study of signed languages: essays in honor of William C. Stokoe. Washington, D.C: Gallaudet University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakhshaee, M., M. Ghasemi, M. Shakeri, N. Razmara, H. Tayarani, and M. Tale. 2007. Speech development in children after cochlear implantation. European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology 264: 1263–1266.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Balkany, T., A. Hodges, C. Menapace, L. Hazard, C. Driscoll, B. Gantz, et al. 2007. Nucleus freedom North American clinical trial. Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery 136: 757–762.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Beadle, E.A., D.J. McKinley, T.P. Nikolopoulos, J. Brough, G.M. O’Donoghue, and S.M. Archbold. 2005. Long-term functional outcomes and academic-occupational status in implanted children after 10 to 14 years of cochlear implant use. Otology & Neurotology 26: 1152–1160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cummins, J. 1999. The ethics of doublethink: language rights and the bilingual education debate. TESOL journal 8: 13–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dettman, S.J., D. Pinder, R.J. Briggs, R.C. Dowell, and J.R. Leigh. 2007. Communication development in children who receive the cochlear implant younger than 12 months: risks versus benefits. Ear and Hearing 28: 11S–18S.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Engen, T.O., and L.A. Kulbrandstad. 2004. Tospråklighet, minoritetsspråk og minoritetsundervisning. Oslo: Gyldedal Akademisk.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erlenkamp, S. 2009. Et synlig språk? Omtalen av norsk tegnspråk i offentlige dokumenter. In Hørsel—språk og kommunikasjon; en artikkelsamling, ed. Å.L. Hansen, N. Garm, and E. Hjelmervik, 160–168. Trondheim: Møller Kompetansesenter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geers, A.E. 2004. Speech, language, and reading skills after early cochlear implantation. Archives of Otolaryngology—Head & Neck Surgery 130: 634–638.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geers, A.E. 2006. Factors influencing spoken language outcomes in children following early cochlear implantation. Advances in Oto-Rhino-Laryngology 64: 50–65.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Grønlie, S.M. 2005. Uten hørsel? En bok om hørselshemming. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hauser, P.C., and M. Marschark. 2008. What we know and what we don’t know about cognition and deaf learners. In Deaf cognition: foundations and outcomes, ed. M. Marschark and P.C. Hauser, 439–457. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hawker, K., J. Ramirez-Inscoe, D.V. Bishop, T. Twomey, G.M. O’Donoghue, and D.R. Moore. 2008. Disproportionate language impairment in children using cochlear implants. Ear and Hearing 29: 467–471.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Heian, A., and S. Hillesøy. 2009. Auditiv-verbal tilnærming—en vei til Rom? In Hørsel—Språk og Kommunikasjon. En Artikkelsamling, ed. Å.L. Hansen, N. Garm, and E. Hjelmervik, 39–47. Trondheim: Møller Kompetansesenter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holtsmark, H., and J. Borrebæk. 2009. Kostbare erfaringer for vårt døve barn. Tidsskrift for Den Norske Legeforening 129: 662–663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonas, H. 1985. Technik, Medizin und Ethik: zur Praxis des Prinzips Verantwortung. Frankfurt am Main: Insel Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kermit, P. 2006. Tegnspråk og anerkjennelsen av døve som en språklig minoritet. In Tegn som språk: En antologi om tegnspråk, ed. S.R. Jørgensen and R.L. Anjum. Oslo: Gyldendal Akademisk.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kermit, P. 2009. Deaf or deaf? Questioning alleged antinomies in the bioethical discourses on cochlear implantation and suggesting an alternative approach to d/deafness. Scandinavian Journal of Disability Research 11: 159–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, C.S., S.H. Oh, S.O. Chang, H.M. Kim, and D.G. Hur. 2008. Management of complications in cochlear implantation. Acta Oto-Laryngologica 128: 408–414.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kirk, K.I., and S. Choi. 2009. Clinical Investigations of cochlear implant performance. In Cochlear implants: principles & practices, 2nd edition, ed. J.K. Niparko, 191–222. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kunnskapsdepartementet. 1998. Lov om grunnskolen og den vidaregåande opplæringa.

  • Kusche, C.A., T.S. Garfield, and M.T. Greenberg. 1983. The understanding of emotional and social attributions in deaf adolescents. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology 12: 153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lahey, M. 1988. Language disorders and language development. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lane, H., and M. Grodin. 1997. Ethical issues in cochlear implant surgery: an exploration into disease, disability, and the best interests of the child. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 7: 231–251.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Levy, N. 2002. Reconsidering cochlear implants: the lessons of Martha’s Vineyard. Bioethics 16: 134–153.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lian, A. 2008. Cochleaimplantat og spesifikke språkvansker. Tidsskrift for Den Norske Legeforening 128: 712.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, F.R., and J.K. Niparko. 2006. Measuring health-related quality of life after paediatric cochlear implantation: A systematic review. International Journal of Paediatric Otorhinolaryngology 70: 1695–1706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marschark, M., C. Rhoten, and M. Fabich. 2007. Effects of cochlear implants on children’s reading and academic achievement. The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 12: 269–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mellon, N.K. 2009. Implications of parental choice of communication mode: understanding the options. In Cochlear implants: principles & practices, ed. J.K. Niparko, 343–345. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miyamoto, R.T., M.J. Hay-McCutcheon, K.I. Kirk, D.M. Houston, and T. Bergeson-Dana. 2008. Language skills of profoundly deaf children who received cochlear implants under 12 months of age: a preliminary study. Acta Oto-Laryngologica 128: 373–377.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nakamura, K. 2006. Deaf in Japan. Signing and the politics of identity. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholas, J.G., and A.E. Geers. 2007. Will they catch up? The role of age at cochlear implantation in the spoken language development of children with severe to profound hearing loss. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research 50: 1048–1062.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niparko, J.K. 2009. The cultural implications of cochlear implants. In Cochlear implants; principles & practices, ed. J.K. Niparko, 335–341. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunes, R. 2001. Ethical dimension of paediatric cochlear implantation. Theoretical Medicine & Bioethics 22: 337–349.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Padden, C., and T. Humphries. 1988. Deaf in America, voices from a culture. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, M. 2007a. Should the precautionary principle guide our actions or our beliefs? Journal of Medical Ethics 33: 5–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, M. 2007b. The precautionary principle should not be used as a basis for decision-making. EMBO Reports 8: 305–308.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pisoni, D.B., and M. Cleary. 2003. Measures of working memory span and verbal rehearsal speed in deaf children after cochlear implantation. Ear and Hearing 24: 106S–120S.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pisoni, D.B., C.M. Conway, W.G. Kronenberger, D.L. Horn, J. Karpicke, and S.C. Henning. 2008. Efficacy and effectiveness of cochlear implants in deaf children. In Deaf cognition: foundations and outcomes, ed. M. Marschark and P.C. Hauser, 52–101. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Richter, B., S. Eissele, R. Laszig, and E. Lohle. 2002. Receptive and expressive language skills of 106 children with a minimum of 2 years’ experience in hearing with a cochlear implant. International Journal of Paediatric Otorhinolaryngology 64: 111–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rydberg, E., L.C. Gellerstedt, and B. Danermark. 2009. Toward an equal level of educational attainment between deaf and hearing people in Sweden? Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 14: 312–323.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sagi, E., M.B. Fitzgerald, and M.A. Svirsky. 2007. What matched comparisons can and cannot tell us: the case of cochlear implants. Ear and Hearing 28: 571–579.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sarant, J.Z., P.J. Blamey, R.C. Dowell, G.M. Clark, and W.P.R. Gibson. 2001. Variation in speech perception scores among children with cochlear implants. Ear and Hearing 22: 18–28.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schauwers, K., S. Gillis, K. Daemers, B.C. De, C.G. De, M. Yperman, et al. 2004. Normal hearing and language development in a deaf-born child. Otology and Neurotology 25(6): 924–929.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Siem, G., O.B. Wie, and S. Harris. 2008. Cochleaimplantat og tegnspråk. Tidskrift for Den norske Legeforening 128: 69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, L.J., B.J. Gantz, and J.F. Knutson. 2004. Outcomes and achievement of students who grew up with access to cochlear implants. Laryngoscope 114: 1576–1581.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stokoe Jr., W.C. 2005. Sign language structure: an outline of the visual communication systems of the American deaf. The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 10: 3–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Svartholm, K. 2005. Döva barn bör få lära sig både teckenspråk och svenska. Läkartidningen 102: 1667–1668.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tait, M., R.L. De, and T.P. Nikolopoulos. 2007. Deaf children with cochlear implants before the age of 1 year: comparison of preverbal communication with normally hearing children. Internatinal Journal of Paediatric Otorhinolaryngology 71: 1605–1611.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. 1992. Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. The United Nations.

  • Thoutenhoofd, E.D., S.M. Archbold, S. Gregory, M.E. Lutman, T.P. Nikolopoulos, and T.H. Sach. 2005. Paediatric cochlear implantation. London: Whurr Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tobey, E.A., A.E. Geers, C. Brenner, D. Altuna, and G. Gabbert. 2003. Factors associated with development of speech production skills in children implanted by age five. Ear and Hearing 24: 36S–45S.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tomblin, J.B., B.A. Barker, and S. Hubbs. 2007. Developmental constraints on language development in children with cochlear implants. International Journal of Audiology 46: 512–523.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Uziel, A.S., M. Sillon, A. Vieu, F. Artieres, J.P. Piron, J.P. Daures, et al. 2007. Ten-year follow-up of a consecutive series of children with multichannel cochlear implants. Otology & Neurotology 28: 615–628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vygotskij, L. 1978. Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wei, B.P., G.M. Clark, S.J. O’Leary, R.K. Shepherd, and R.M. Robins-Browne. 2007a. Meningitis after cochlear implantation. British Medical Journal 335: 1058.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wei, B.P.C., R.K. Shepherd, R.M. Robins-Browne, G.M. Clark, and S.J. O’Leary. 2007b. Threshold shift: Effects of cochlear implantation on the risk of pneumococcal meningitis. Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery 136: 589–596.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wie, O.B., E.S. Falkenberg, O. Tvete, and B. Tomblin. 2007. Children with a cochlear implant: characteristics and determinants of speech recognition, speech-recognition growth rate, and speech production. International Journal of Audiology 46: 232–243.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wittgenstein, L. 1967. Philosophical investigations. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Commission on the Ethics of Scientific Knowledge and Technology. 2005. The Precautionary Principle. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.

  • Young, G.A., and D.H. Killen. 2002. Receptive and expressive language skills of children with 5 years of experience using a cochlear implant. Annals of Otology, Rhinology and Laryngology 111: 802–810.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

I wish to thank Bjørn Myskja at the Department of Philosophy, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, for invaluable help with writing this text. I also want to thank both Berge Solberg, Department of Social Work and Health Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, and Sidsel Holiman, Department of Educational Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, for their help and comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Social Work and Health Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Dragvoll, 7491, Trondheim, Norway

    Patrick Kermit

  2. Sør-Trøndelag University College, 7004, Trondheim, Norway

    Patrick Kermit

Authors
  1. Patrick Kermit
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Patrick Kermit.

Additional information

Sponsors

Funding for the empirical research project described here was provided by the Department of Social Work and Health Science at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kermit, P. Choosing for the child with cochlear implants: a note of precaution. Med Health Care and Philos 13, 157–167 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-010-9232-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-010-9232-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation