“Unlocking the World of Sound for Deaf Children.”

Ella Stupart

Mr. Ippolito C Even

October 10, 2018

Current Event

Citation:

Brody, Jane E. “Unlocking the World of Sound for Deaf Children.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 8 Oct. 2018, www.nytimes.com/2018/10/08/well/live/unlocking-the-world-of-sound-for-deaf-children.html?rref=collection/sectioncollection/health&action=click&contentCollection=health®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=4&pgtype=sectionfront.

Jane E. Brody’s article “Unlocking the World of Sound for Deaf Children” explains and promotes a new piece of technology that allows deaf people to hear called the cochlear implant. Brody begins with an optimistic tone by sharing the opinion of a pediatric audiology consultant, Jane R. Madell that there is the possibility for almost all deaf children to hear again. Brody claims that cochlear implants, especially in children, are an important tool in regaining hearing. According to the article, a cochlear implant is a device that is inserted in the ear through surgery that allows for sound waves to come in direct contact with the the auditory nerve, passing the hair cells in the ear that do not work.  These implants can be inserted into babies with hearing disabilities “before they can walk” and babies who receive the implants early enough can develop language skills at the same rate as children who were born without a hearing disability. After providing many success stories, Brody briefly mentions that many deaf people do not support implants and believe that deaf children should instead learn sign language and then refutes this point, stating “...only 0.1 percent of the population knows sign language, and 95 percent of deaf children are born to hearing parents, who then have to spend a long time learning to sign, during a period when children are normally learning to speak.”(Brody 18). Brody then informs the audience of the importance of screening children for auditory disabilities being screened at birth; when these issues are treated early on, children can develop their language abilities at the same rate as other children their age.

The cochlear implant is a major development in medicine. It has already helped thousands of deaf people to hear again and will continue to do so. According to the article, when talking about children that receive the implant, Dr. Madell claims that “‘Eighty-five percent of such children are successfully mainstreamed.’”(Brody 3). Most of the children being treated with these implants are able to live normal lives afterwards with minimal complications regarding their normally life altering condition. This device has also helped adults whose hearing aids were no longer effective. The success stories presented in this article are proof that the cochlear implant has changed people’s lives for the better and will continue to do so.

Brody successfully appeals to the audience’s pathos and logos in this article. She appealed to pathos by including touching success stories that cause the reader to feel empathy towards deaf people and their families. She also appeals to pathos at the end of the article when explaining the importance of newborn babies being screened for hearing loss. This may cause the reader to worry about whether or not their future kids will have hearing disabilities and will make them more likely to be certain the tests are done when they do have children. When people can personally connect to an article, they are more likely to consider the author’s point and will remember it for a longer amount of time. Brody also appealed to logos by including the opinion  of an auditory doctor along with multiple statistics support her claims. While Brody successfully supported the argument that cochlear implants are an important development and should be used more frequently, she did not spend a lot of time refuting opposing views or bringing up negative aspects of this device, which leads the reader to think that the author is biased. There was only one brief instance in the article when Brody brought up an opposing claim and she did not elaborate on it very thoroughly. I was left with questions about availability, cost, whether or not it is covered by insurance, how many doctors are able to perform the surgery, and possible side effects or negative aspects of the device. Including these points would strengthen Brody’s argument even further. Brody’s overall argument was well supported by facts and statistics, persuasive, and informative.