“Genetic Dilemmas and the Child’s Right to an Open Future,” by Dena Davis Thesis 1: Whether deafness is viewed as a disability, which narrows a child’s future options, or a culture, which narrows the child’s option to not be associated with that culture or participate fully in mainstream culture, purposefully having a child who is deaf is a moral harm to the child. Allowing an adult to make a decision for a child before they are born to place her in the Deaf culture or otherwise limit her future career options is morally wrong and is not a goal that should be assisted by genetic counsellors.
Premise 1: If a deaf couple wishes to have a child that is also deaf the counselor has the right to reject their request because purposefully …show more content…
Premise 3: The autonomy of one’s self is greater than the autonomy of others, and self-autonomy must be protected. A genetic counselor can protect a baby’s self-autonomy by not complying to the parental request to have a deaf baby.
Premise 4: Part of a person’s autonomy is having the right to join or leave the groups they want to and not be placed in a group before their birth by their parents choice.
“Ethical Issues in Cochlear Implant Surgery,” by Harlan Lane and Michael Grodin Thesis 1: Deafness is not considered a disability by the Deaf-world, people who are deaf belong to a common culture which makes up a minority. Therefore, it follows that any interference, such as a cochlear implants or genetically altering embryos before birth, is not morally sound because deafness is not a disability that needs to be “fixed” and these actions threaten the survival of a culture, which fits the definition of genocide.
Premise 1: The Deaf-world, which is also a minority, would shrink or cease to exist if deaf people were given successful cochlear implant surgeries. Premise 2: Preventing births within the Deaf-world is a form of genocide
Premise 1: If a deaf couple wishes to have a child that is also deaf the counselor has the right to reject their request because purposefully …show more content…
Premise 3: The autonomy of one’s self is greater than the autonomy of others, and self-autonomy must be protected. A genetic counselor can protect a baby’s self-autonomy by not complying to the parental request to have a deaf baby.
Premise 4: Part of a person’s autonomy is having the right to join or leave the groups they want to and not be placed in a group before their birth by their parents choice.
“Ethical Issues in Cochlear Implant Surgery,” by Harlan Lane and Michael Grodin Thesis 1: Deafness is not considered a disability by the Deaf-world, people who are deaf belong to a common culture which makes up a minority. Therefore, it follows that any interference, such as a cochlear implants or genetically altering embryos before birth, is not morally sound because deafness is not a disability that needs to be “fixed” and these actions threaten the survival of a culture, which fits the definition of genocide.
Premise 1: The Deaf-world, which is also a minority, would shrink or cease to exist if deaf people were given successful cochlear implant surgeries. Premise 2: Preventing births within the Deaf-world is a form of genocide