Comments on: Should Deaf Parents Have a Deaf Child?

By: sam

sam — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 19:36:47 +0000

In the abscence of consensus the government does, which is what they are doing in the UK. It’s what you elect them for, someone has to take the lead, or it drags on and on with no solution. Genetic ID is here, a lot more decisions on a lot more ‘disabilities’ are going to come as well. Perhaps the real downside, is the respective Dear/deaf and disability minorities have no cohesive body, view, or approach, there’s no unity to put a collective view. Looking at deaf.read and other sites,not likely for some time to come either. Never was there more a need, for a united front, I don’t see it.am sam a nice man an single an full deaf ok

By: sam

sam — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 19:35:30 +0000

hello am same am looking for real deaf that is single an honest an caring an nice person ok taht i will love so much ok am sam However, deafness isn’t a life-threatening condition. Understandably some parents won’t want that, but what about other parents who don’t mind and don’t want to be tested at all? The government is robbing them their choices.

By: MM

MM — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 19:37:27 +0000

Designing ANY child by free choice is fraught with major issues. It negates natural choice for a start, alters the natural status quo, and encourages all sorts of extreme viewpoint to be re-enacted genetically and foisted on generation after generation.

IVF once it can determine with certainty genes, then anyone wanting children will start asking the Dr’s if they can have a screen too, they do anyway for a number of issues as we know. “I’d like a boy, 6ft tall, blue eyes, no disabilities, brown hair……”

Americans LOVE their images don’t they ? (Yep the UK blames YOU for all the problems !), and will be the first, it won’t be the impoverished UK that will set any ball rolling but the USA.

By: Karen Mayes

Karen Mayes — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:02:22 +0000

Designing a baby… I MIGHT be OK with it AS LONG AS the parents get counseling and pass certain tests to make sure that they have no illusions about what designed babies should be like… at the end the designed babies do make decisions that the parents would not be prepared for. I would have a problem with the first/second trmester pregnancy tests which could screen out the certain genes and might force abortion in the future. I know nowadays the parents are given the option to carry to full term or to terminlate the pregnancy. But the question is how much invovlement government should have? We are seeing a lot of government invovlement in China.

*Rubbing my forehead* scary.

By: MM

MM — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 09:12:59 +0000

It’s a minefield, history shows many countries have operated their own form of ‘ethnic cleansing’ (Which the UK Eugenics clause has been aligned to by some). They may not have used clinical means, but even in recent memory the issues of Serbia, Idi Amin, Darfur etc etc, gave us stark proof not a lot has changed…. I really don’t see how the ‘Deaf’ can isolate this issue, when they don’t even have consensus amongst themselves. If they are going to use history as a reference, they better start reading up on it…..

By: Melissa

Melissa — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 23:02:58 +0000

I agree that there is no comparison between deafness and Tay-Sachs. I brought it up only because if we legislate, it’s not a black and white issue. We can’t legislate completely against IVF selection of embryos. So then decisions have to be made, and there is not going to be a way to please the entire population.

By: Mishka Zena

Mishka Zena — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 18:47:42 +0000

Melissa, that is a horrible degenerative disease. Many of my friends were tested for it prior to conception of their children, too. It would be too cruel to let an embryo carrying this disease mature to a newborn.

However, deafness isn’t a life-threatening condition. Understandably some parents won’t want that, but what about other parents who don’t mind and don’t want to be tested at all? The government is robbing them their choices.

Karen, hmm, what if this has come to the point that the parents can design their babies? A male over a female? Blonde over dark hair? Tall genes over average height genes? Let’s throw in super genes so the baby will have an Olympics potential?

We are entering a new and very complicated territory where we can play God. This is a scary responsibility

MM , maybe because this is happening in UK, too far away from Americans. If they are fully aware of the pro- eugenic conference the Royal Society of Medicine recently had, they should be very alarmed. I am surprised this pro-eugenic conference isn’t well-publicized as that will give the Britons a second thought. I must admit I was startled when I came across this article.

By: MM

MM — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:42:22 +0000

By: Melissa

Melissa — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 16:27:17 +0000

There are some truly horrible genetic diseases out there. One in particular that comes to mind is Tay-Sachs, which starts to affect a baby at only a few months old and is fatal by age 4. Here is a description of it from the NIH website:

“Infants with Tay-Sachs disease appear to develop normally for the first few months of life. Then, as nerve cells become distended with fatty material, a relentless deterioration of mental and physical abilities occurs. The child becomes blind, deaf, and unable to swallow. Muscles begin to atrophy and paralysis sets in. Other neurological symptoms include dementia, seizures, and an increased startle reflex to noise.”

This disease runs in Ashkenazi Jews. My husband and I were tested after we were married, and we were not carriers. However, what should a couple do if they find out that they both are carriers? If it were me, I can say with 100% certainty that I would not leave this to chance because this is a horrendous disease that results in a baby who spends its entire short life suffering terribly.

The question for me is when is selection appropriate? For severe genetic diseases like Tay-Sachs, I think that this decision should be left to the parents. Then, the bigger question comes as to how do we legislate? Who gets to decide what is okay and what is not?

By: Karen Mayes

Karen Mayes — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 10:40:51 +0000

I see this subject is least commented to, especially by Americans… all because we don’t have the luxury of being under the threat that the law could be passed, like U.K. is. I guess it is due to the mentality of what is happening is on another land, so we keep our heads buried in sand like ostriches.

Hmmm… I am not accusing anyone. We went through with the wars, especially WWII when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, and especially with the 9/11, when it was a blow of shock to us.

Guess we’d be experiencing a kind of shock wave sooner or later.