Thread: Hunting With Hearing Aids

Originally Posted by tetawa

Beware of ACC claims from yesteryear, originally claimed early 1980's, no problems aids and $'s. Told to get a re-assessment after 10 years, all ok new aids supplied. Went back early 2000's, sorry we only keep our records for 7 years, you have to start again. Did that, new specialist. Couldn't believe when his report stated " not from hunting, firearms use, industry, etc, but hereditary" even though no other hearing problems in my family. ACC would only cover 17% of costs. I've had tinnitus bad for the last 40 plus years, found that aids didn't do much for me if there is any back ground noise.

I would appeal this and maybe get another audiologist.
Am on my 5th set and acc and ministry o health are funding a bit over half the cost.

Originally Posted by nevereadyfreddy

I would appeal this and maybe get another audiologist.
Am on my 5th set and acc and ministry o health are funding a bit over half the cost.

Putting my retired audiologist hat on, the ACC decision is nothing to so with the audiologist. ACC goes on the "opinion" of an ear specialist in making their decision. Tetawa is dead right- about 10-15yrs ago, ACC put the hard word of specialists to tighten up their decisions and that was roughly the time they also cut back on funding levels. In the early days, specialists would mostly say the vast majority of the loss was industrial noise and ACC at that time were funding 100% of aid costs with no limit! That couldn't last of course and the funding cutbacks were harsh. ACC have subsequently relented to some extent but the -max- current contribution for a pair of aids is just under $5000. Most people will end up in a lower funding band with less contribution, the minimum being $3140. My advice is shop around on costs and make sure you trial aids properly in a range of situations. They can take many weeks to get used to and are only as good as the fine-tuning the audiologist needs to do.

Some comments about aid useability for hunting. You need to know the vast majority of sound delivery couplings are very leaky, especially the micro behind-the-ear (BTE) types with domes. This means that although nothing damaging is getting through the electronics, you're still copping the full natural blast from the report so unsuppressed guns still need hearing protection. The second issue is localisation ( your ability to pick direction) and this is best with "open" plumbing systems like most of the micro BTE aids use. If you have a more severe loss/ middle ear issues/ big diff between loss on each side, your localisation is unlikely to be good. The other issue is wind noise and this varies hugely. Having hair over your ears helps a lot but isn't relevant to many of you.. Better models have some useful noise reduction tech but it varies in effectiveness. Only the super micro deep canal models are free from wind noise but these don't suit most people and have other issues. The final issue is water damage- while most aids are now IP67 rated, they are not fully waterproof so getting them really drowned is not a clever thing.

Sounds about right. Am being funded $3160 on my new ones.

Originally Posted by nevereadyfreddy

I would appeal this and maybe get another audiologist.
Am on my 5th set and acc and ministry o health are funding a bit over half the cost.

I still have the "paperwork" from my original consultations and ACC correspondence, the audiologist on my early 2000 visit didn't want to know. Even with ACC had problems when I disputed the findings, case officer not working today or on "stress leave". May have another go at them but as stated my tinnitus is a big factor.

Originally Posted by tetawa

I still have the "paperwork" from my original consultations and ACC correspondence, the audiologist on my early 2000 visit didn't want to know. Even with ACC had problems when I disputed the findings, case officer not working today or on "stress leave". May have another go at them but as stated my tinnitus is a big factor.

That paperwork may be worth more than gold.
A workmate had a car accident maybe 20 or more yrs ago. The case went thru ACC as it existed in those days and was accepted. Workmate recovered but recently the injury flared up. ACC denied the existence of his case on their records. He produced the original documentation and ACC reluctantly accepted it. His surgery (multiple) ran to something like $200k.

Yeah, been through the case officer away etc, including changing case officers several times.

Originally Posted by tetawa

I still have the "paperwork" from my original consultations and ACC correspondence, the audiologist on my early 2000 visit didn't want to know. ..

Whatever their apparent attitude, the reality is they didn't cause it, and more particularly, would have had zero influence in the possible appeal. In fact, ACC would have gleefully said the audiologist had a conflict of interest if they tried to intervene.