Deaf couple would like a deaf child Watch

Kittennffc
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#21
Report 10 years ago
#21
Just to preface, I havn't read the article, just read what people have said on here.

I can understand why a deaf couple would want to have a deaf child, purely for convenience, but to have IVF with the intention to screen for the deaf gene is disgusting. It's just a way of them playing God, and manipulating the system. Like other people have said, why not adopt? There must be hundreds if not thousands of children all over the world who need a loving family, and being looked over because they are deaf.

A sick misuse of science in my opinion.
0
quote
reply
Redefined
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#22
Report 10 years ago
#22
I can see perhaps why they would want it but to seriously contemplate only accepting an embryo by the fact that it will develop into a deaf child is beyond words.

Does that mean a family with all of its members having blonde hair can choose an embryo which will develop into a child with blonde hair?!?

Can you imagine if the child asks "Why me?" The only response can be "Because we wanted you to be".
0
quote
reply
Brighten
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#23
Report 10 years ago
#23
They should definititely adopt. Most hearing couples don't know sign language or ways of communicating with a deaf child so they wouldn't adopt one, therefore I'm sure there are many deaf children sitting in children's homes who would like to be adopted. It's bizarre that they would deliberately choose to limit their childs life experience by making sure that it cannot hear.
0
quote
reply
Segat1
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#24
Report Thread starter 10 years ago
#24
Thanks for the repsonses.

Does anyone lknow the age limit for adoption in the UK? I think they're in their 40s and wondered if they'd tried this route...
0
quote
reply
louisedotcom
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#25
Report 10 years ago
#25
I saw a documentary about this about a year ago, dont know if it was the same people though- (it must be really, how many people are that bonkers?)

All I could think to myself is how disgustingly selfish they are, and it actually made me feel pretty angry. I really dont think it should be allowed- to intentionally create and bring into the world a baby with a disability. What Valid, justifiable reason do they have for doing it?

If its natural, and they just happened to concieve a baby that ended up being deaf thats fine as it cant be helped, but to set out to create a baby that would have a disability and could potentially struggle with that disability for the rest of its life is a little bit sick in my opinion. I for the life of me cant understand why any parent would ever, ever want to put their child in that position. Surely you want whats best for the child- I dont see how being deaf is of long term benefit?
0
quote
reply
crema
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#26
Report 10 years ago
#26
^
Alot of people here are saying how it is so unfair and completely selfish to deliberately bring in a _disabled_ child into world, or something to that extent. But deaf people don't necessarily consider themselves to be disabled, just that it is one trait amongst others. They differentiate themselves to be speaking a different language, not missing something (ie the spoken language). So in a way I do understand why parents would want to have a deaf child, it would naturally belong to the same community. And after reading that article I understand their logic! If during the normal IVF-treatment eggs with the deaf-gene are automatically discarded, why couldn't they discard the hearing eggs? Why should they be discriminated against and made to be disabled, when to them their lack of hearing is natural?

Personally I think IVF should only de-select serious medical conditions, and be as natural as possible. But it is hard to draw a line into what is a serious condition enough so I won't go into that now... Haven't really thought about it.
0
quote
reply
Redefined
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#27
Report 10 years ago
#27
(Original post by Segat1)
Thanks for the repsonses.

Does anyone lknow the age limit for adoption in the UK? I think they're in their 40s and wondered if they'd tried this route...
At least 21, as far as I know there is no upper age limit.
0
quote
reply
CartesianFart
Badges: 0
#28
Report 10 years ago
#28
I've known alot of deaf people (not the hearing impaired since they have both of the two worlds) that are proud of being deaf and find themselves content to their sense of belonging in the sign language community. I am not suprised to see this.
0
quote
reply
Llamaaa
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#29
Report 10 years ago
#29
Imagine how the child would feel if when he grew up he found out that his parents actively sought to deprive him of his hearing? I do understand the parents' reasoning, but it doesn't seem right to me. Then I don't think it's right to screen embryos at all - it should be pure chance as it is with natural conception. None of this rejecting an embryo because it's deaf or choosing it for the same reason. You get what you're given, and should be happy with whatever that is.
0
quote
reply
Redefined
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#30
Report 10 years ago
#30
(Original post by Llamaaa)
Then I don't think it's right to screen embryos at all - it should be pure chance as it is with natural conception. None of this rejecting an embryo because it's deaf or choosing it for the same reason. You get what you're given, and should be happy with whatever that is.
Oh I don't know about that. If it means a child is born without a severely debilitating feature I see no harm.
0
quote
reply
Lychee
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#31
Report 10 years ago
#31
If I was born without use of my legs, I would not try to have my child born without them jsut so he could be part of the 'disabled community.'
But the deaf community is a distinct community with its own language and history. people with no legs participate in the hearing community and do not have a distinct culture so the analogy is not correct.

I think the issue is more that if hearing people are allowed to select haering children which fits in with their lifestlye why cant deaf people do the same? If you deny that right then yopu are implying that someone with hearing is superior to someone who is deaf not just different which imo is wrong. Personally i do not think you should be able to screen for either, but if you allow one you should allow the other iyswim. A lot of the comments in this section betray the attitudes of peopel who have had little contact with the deaf community but it is really not a disability (though it might be a disadvantage in some ways), in the same way that not speaking english cannot be considered a disability, though again it is a disadvantage.
0
quote
reply
20083
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#32
Report 10 years ago
#32
Wow, how much will that kid resent them when it finds out the truth later in life?
0
quote
reply
Frannnnn
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#33
Report 10 years ago
#33
wowww, if my parents were deaf i'd shout things like "my mum tries to snort bubblebath from my dads vagina!" in front of them.
0
quote
reply
Llamaaa
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#34
Report 10 years ago
#34
(Original post by law:portal)
Oh I don't know about that. If it means a child is born without a severely debilitating feature I see no harm.
So a child with a disability is worth less than a healthy one? I do understand it from the view that it's not nice to live with a disability, but if you are in a situation where people simply say, that one is disabled, its life isn't worth anything. I am just uncomfortable with that notion. I think all lives are equal so I don't think that its fair to allow people to reject an embryo on those grounds. Having said that, it's better that than aborting it for the same reason, I suppose.

I don't know, I haven't really formulated my ideas very well yet. I am just uncomfortable with the idea of one life being worth more than another.
0
quote
reply
Kittten
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#35
Report 10 years ago
#35
(Original post by SillyFencer)
Wow, how much will that kid resent them when it finds out the truth later in life?
Surely it wont resent its parent at all! They will not be making a hearing embryo deaf, but rather choosing to keep one which was already deaf. So really it would be extra pleased that its parents faught not to be forced to discard it just becuse of its deafness.
0
quote
reply
20083
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#36
Report 10 years ago
#36
(Original post by Kittten)
Surely it wont resent its parent at all! They will not be making a hearing embryo deaf, but rather choosing to keep one which was already deaf. So really it would be extra pleased that its parents faught not to be forced to discard it just becuse of its deafness.
Not sure I understand. Who would force them to "discard" the child because it is deaf?
0
quote
reply
Eubacterium
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#37
Report 10 years ago
#37
Apart from what's already been argued against it, I find the parent's attitude prejudice towards those who can hear.

What's next? Choosing an embryo on the bases that the child should have blond hair and blue eyes?
0
quote
reply
Es*
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#38
Report 10 years ago
#38
I don't think screening for a disabled child is any worse or any better than screening for a non-disabled child. Personally, I'm inclined to say that no screening of this sort should be done. I certainly don't support disablist screening programmes which allow disabled/D/deaf children to be screened out, but not in.
0
quote
reply
Kittten
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#39
Report 10 years ago
#39
(Original post by SillyFencer)
Not sure I understand. Who would force them to "discard" the child because it is deaf?

They would be discarding embryos not children. ATM the law says that if a fully abled (hearing) embryo is produced by IVF then itmust be chosen ahead of any which are disabled. This couple are saying they would like to keen a deaf embryo if one were to be produced, rather than be foced to discard it in favour of a hearing one. Or at least that is my understanding of this case, if I'm wrong please correct me.
0
quote
reply
20083
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#40
Report 10 years ago
#40
(Original post by Kittten)
They would be discarding embryos not children. ATM the law says that if a fully abled (hearing) embryo is produced by IVF then itmust be chosen ahead of any which are disabled. This couple are saying they would like to keen a deaf embryo if one were to be produced, rather than be foced to discard it in favour of a hearing one. Or at least that is my understanding of this case, if I'm wrong please correct me.
Hmm, I read it as they will get pregnant and then make sure that the baby is born deaf. Not sure now.
0
quote
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Were you ever put in isolation at school?

Yes (149)
27.85%
No (386)
72.15%

Watched Threads

View All