That's why I wrote this blog posting last summertime 2008 to urge the Deaf America to block the re-introduction of the Early Detection of Hearing Loss (EDHI) bill within the U.S. Senate.
I am very glad to see some people like you and others begin to realize what the EDHI intentionally pave the way for cochelar implantizing deaf babies and youngsters than just screening and providing balanced advices and options to parents of deaf babies and youngsters.
I have not been bothered with the follow-up updates of the EDHI bill so far. I rather see the EDHI bill being dead in the process than bringing up to the table for votes. If the U.S. Senate pass the EDHI bill, then the real nightmare for the Deaf America will come beyond our imagination.
It's time for us, Deaf America to act and keep the EDHI from becoming the real law!
We also could do something about the upcoming SCHI (health insurance for children) funding proposal for cochlear implant surgery on deaf babies and youngsters thru the Medicaid and other government fundings.
Our government really have no business of promoting the human engineering option or linguiscism of American Sign Langauge (ASL) at all.
Robert L. Mason
RLMDEAF blog *enclosure below from last summertime 2008 blog posting*
FYI, the re-authorization of "Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Act" (EDHI) legislative bill have been recently introduced to the U.S. Senate for final voting anytime this summertime.
This bill have been passed in the House of Representatives known as H.R. 2889 last April 2008. The EDHI bill is also an amendment to the S 1712 bill known as "Screening for Health of Infants and Newborns Act" sponsored by Senator Hillary Clinton in 2007. The S 1712 proposed bill have been referred to the U.S. Senate's Health, Education subcommittee twice in past year.
Many of us, deaf people are much aware of how this original legislation back in 2000, kinda responsible for spawning the path for parents of deaf babies and youngsters to get cochlear implant surgery quicker and sooner.
More and more deaf babies and children got cochlear implant surgery, BECAUSE of this damned legislation. That's what the AGBell had in mind when called and supported for the idea of newborns' hearing screening and intervention for quick way of getting deaf babies and youngsters to get cochlear implant surgery much younger than ever. NAD was too blind for supporting this 2000 legislation without making sure that every parents of would-be deaf newborn or youngster to give real options like consulting deaf agencies to get unbiased information and feedback.
"Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Act" legislation led the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to approve the CI surgery for deaf babies much sooner after six months old. That's what the AGBell want to exploit parents of deaf babies and youngsters' emotional upsetness to find out about their baby or child officially screened as deaf. So parents of deaf babies and youngsters could rush to the decision to cochlearize their own deaf offspring(s) without giving a chance to see and appreciate what their deaf infant/child really is all about.
AGBell and other audiology and financial industry often got upset with the original legislation due to the lack of follow-up incentives for the intervention programs to be in gear to get parents of deaf babies and youngsters coming back for getting cochlear implant or digital hearing aids. They wanted to make sure that no cracks within the system for parents of deaf babies and youngsters leaving the hospital without considerations for cochlear implant or digital hearing aids.
The U.S. House of Representatives passed the similar bill related to the EDHI programs like
H.R. 1198 last April 2008 which enabled the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to establish the post-doctoral research fellowship program to effectively recruit researchers to become involved in early hearing detection and intervention and provide the agency authority (state agency) to support excellent family-to-family support programs developed by state EDHI programs and other organizations that are not yet widely implemented.
Why many business-oriented publications like the Forbes magazine bothered to report on the National Center on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (NCDCD)'s Research Symposium on "New Mechanism in Auditory Discrimination And Speech in Deafness" at the AGBell 2008 Conference in Milwaukee? That raise many questions about real intentions of money-making incentives for American corporations to ride on the S 1712 bill within the 110th Congress's.
Here are our chances to block the Re-Authorization of Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Act bill in the U.S Senate to vote on! We could demand for having an open congressional forum with the AGBell and other audiology-interest groups to find out why many parents of deaf babies and youngsters and deaf clients to be heavily requested whether they want cochlear implant surgery during the simple audiology visit(s). Many deaf adults feel offended when they come to the audiology office for hearing aid-related problems and ended up of being stealthily asked if they are interested in getting cochlear implant or not.
Our elected national lawmakers ought to know what is really going on with the profit-driven industry to reel in the emotionally-wrecked parents of deaf babies and youngsters to cochlearize their own offspring without any considerable or unbiased information from any intervention programs within audiology industry and audiology interest groups.
The national lawmakers ought to explore the costly impact of cochlear implant surgery on deaf babies and youngsters with the creation of federal commission to study the long-term consequences on the health of deaf individuals with cochlear implant devices. The commission must be fairly balanced staffed with deaf advocates and deaf professionals for the unbiased outcomes of the commission's findings.
Please contact your U.S. Senator(s) to hold off the S 17172 bill until the creation of federal commission and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to investigative the audiology, cochlear implant and other audiology interest groups, ex. AGBell for possible racketeering and monopolistic practices along with too many "conflict of interest" occurrences.
There are also other critics of the proposed U.S. Senate bill, S 1712 from the privacy groups about the potential government database collection on every newborns about their DNA and health ailments.
Robert L. Mason (RLM)
Robert L. Mason (RLM)