In the Western world, for deaf and hard-of-hearing children, hearing aids or cochlear implants are available to provide access to sound, with the overall goal of increasing their wellbeing. If and how this goal is achieved becomes increasingly multifarious when these children reach adolescence and young adulthood and start to participate in society in other ways. An approach to wellbeing that includes personal differences and the relative advantages and disadvantages that people have, is the capability approach, as developed by Nobel Prize laureate Amartya Sen. Capability is the set of real opportunities people have to do and be things they have reason to value. We interviewed 59 young people, aged 13 through 25, with cochlear implants (37) or hearing aids (22) to capture their capability. We found that their hearing devices enabled them to actively participate in a predominantly hearing society, with few differences between cochlear implant and hearing aid recipients. They did, however, report challenges associated with prejudices and expectations, and with feeling poorly understood, all of which appeared to impact their capability. Through the lens of capability, alleged differences between hearing aid and cochlear implant recipients began to fade. We discuss the implications for initiatives focused on the long-term support young recipients of hearing devices to meet their specific requirements over time.

We investigated 34 deaf and hard-of-hearing children with hearing devices aged 8–12 years and 30 typical hearing peers. We used the capability approach to assess well-being in both groups through interviews. Capability is “the real freedom people have to do and to be what they have reason to value.” Speech perception, phonology, and receptive vocabulary data of the deaf and hard-of-hearing children, that were used retrospectively, showed a large variability. The analysis of the relation between clinical quantitative outcome measures and qualitative capability interview outcomes suggests that at this age, differences in clinical performance do not appear to translate into considerable differences in capability, including capability did offer insight into the factors that appeared to ensure this equivalence of capability. We argue that capability outcomes should be used to determine the focus of (auditory) rehabilitation and support, in line with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.