This honestly doesn't sound very empathetic toward patients. Many of these people had fine hearing and then lost it. They've already "learned" how to hear and they reasonably expect the hearing aid to help restore it.
In your analogy, it would be like if my vision got worse and I got eyeglasses which partially restored it, but mirrored everything upside down with tons of static. Now I've got to learn to read upside down and tune out the static, but don't worry because I get 10 free lessons with a reading instructor. Oh and none of this was clearly explained to me or part of my expectation when buying glasses.
I got high quality progressive eyeglasses some years ago. Hated it at first. It was like swimming in a fish bowl. If you don't position your head correctly things are blurry. Now it's completely natural and I love them. I had to learn.
Hearing aids are the exact same. It's slightly unnatural but once you learn how to use the tool, it's a super power. I can hear conversations in crowded bars when normal people can't. Loud noises compress in a pleasant fashion. I just have to get used to some occasional spatial distortion and subtle flanging
The thing is, though, that it appears to be very different depending on the person. And there seems to be a LOT of cases where the technology just isn't up to the task. Sure, we _can_ blame the user in every case, but if the cases are highly skewed to the users have a poor experience / not hearing well with them, then really it makes more sense to blame the technology until you have proof otherwise.
In your analogy, it would be like if my vision got worse and I got eyeglasses which partially restored it, but mirrored everything upside down with tons of static. Now I've got to learn to read upside down and tune out the static, but don't worry because I get 10 free lessons with a reading instructor. Oh and none of this was clearly explained to me or part of my expectation when buying glasses.