Deaf couple ask for deaf child through IVF - Page 2

Gipper · 03-13-08, 10:01 PM

I would've told them "unnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnh".

Korimyr the Rat · 03-14-08, 02:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gipper

I would've told them "unnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnh".

What does Helen Keller's dog have to do with this?

Sharon den Adel · 03-18-08, 08:42 PM

Quote:

'We celebrated when we found out about Molly's deafness,' says Lichy. 'Being deaf is not about being disabled, or medically incomplete - it's about being part of a linguistic minority.

I can tell this couple that being deaf is certainly a disadvantage. I am partially deaf, myself. I have trouble understanding conversations, I cannot speak to anyone on the phone, I get words mixed up, I have to turn the television up loud to hear, I cannot hear cars on the road at night (I start work early, and have to cross the road, on which most cars don't bother using headlights) and I feel I am missing out on a lot, because I am unable to hear as well as I could.
I am not bitter, but I do consider myself disadvantaged, because I know I am missing out on a lot.

Quote:

'It is a cornerstone of modern society and law that deaf and hearing people have equal rights. If hearing people were to have the right to throw away a deaf embryo, then we as deaf people should also have the right to throw away a hearing embryo.'

He does have a point here, though. If hearing people do have the right to discard a deaf embryo, then we must surely offer the right to discard a hearing embryo to deaf people.

I don't like the idea, and don't agree with it because I know what it is like to be deaf. However, a child born deaf will never know what they are missing, as they will never know any different.

I'm at odds on this one, honestly.

Infinite Chaos · 03-19-08, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikhail

What do people think of this a deaf couple who want a deaf child through IVF.This doesent sit well with me i find it selfish and cruel.

This couple want a deaf child. Should we try to stop them? | Science | The Observer

This really is one of those occasions where watching their interview on BBC TV would have answered all the points people have made on this thread. I am not deaf neither is my partner but I completely understand what they were saying and unfortunately you are reading a 2nd hand version in the observer reporters words. The report on the BBC website echoes the Observer article but to my recollection the couple simply stated that they did not want an embryo which was found to have a deafness gene or condition to be discarded simply for that. They never at any point in the interview said they would choose a "deaf embryo" over a "non-impaired" one.

BBC NEWS | Health | Is it wrong to select a deaf embryo?

It is a shame the story seems to be reported quite differently from the actual interview but they may have gone on to say other comments elsewhere that I have not seen.

mikhail · 03-19-08, 10:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Infinite Chaos

This really is one of those occasions where watching their interview on BBC TV would have answered all the points people have made on this thread. I am not deaf neither is my partner but I completely understand what they were saying and unfortunately you are reading a 2nd hand version in the observer reporters words. The report on the BBC website echoes the Observer article but to my recollection the couple simply stated that they did not want an embryo which was found to have a deafness gene or condition to be discarded simply for that. They never at any point in the interview said they would choose a "deaf embryo" over a "non-impaired" one.

BBC NEWS | Health | Is it wrong to select a deaf embryo?

It is a shame the story seems to be reported quite differently from the actual interview but they may have gone on to say other comments elsewhere that I have not seen.

Yes but it would is clearly unlikely the child wouldnt be deaf.

Infinite Chaos · 03-20-08, 07:55 AM

Hi, this is 2nd hand reporting of what I watched but they were asked about what they were asking - what seems to have upset them was that if they had IVF and the laboratory had two embryoes - one found to be able "to hear" and the other with a "hearing defect" - was that the 2nd would not be automatically discarded. This they felt reflected upon them that deafness was something unworthy and I could understand their views.

The reporter then asked if they would choose the "deaf" embryo over the non deaf one and they never really cleared that up - this is what has been blown up to become them "choosing to create a deaf embryo" and in my view misrepresents what they wanted. As I said before - they may have given other interviews since asking for a specifically deaf embryo only but I can't be certain.

Jambo · 03-23-08, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Panache

I think deliberately engineering your child to be disadvantaged is a bit sick, but I also don't think its the government's business.

... who's business should it be? (and I'm not being rude here)... technology has advanced so much faster than the laws and ethics that govern it... I'm not sure I would trust a business to govern themselves...

Summerwind · 03-23-08, 03:43 PM

After reading all the posts, I think Infinite Chaos has set me straight. To publish a "news report" without this being sensationalized would essentially make it a non-issue. Headline would have to read something bland like, "Deaf couple does not see deafness as a handicap". But put just a touch of spin on it, and it becomes a hot button issue. The MSM is once again doing what it does best, BS the general public by not reporting the whole truth in context.

tryreading · 03-30-08, 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Korimyr the Rat

What does Helen Keller's dog have to do with this?

I was over on the Circumcision thread having a big laugh at all the one-liners (I think on page 2), and now this. Very funny.