Aspies For Freedom

I had heard of this couple, and others like them, wanting to have a deaf child, as one of the women in my bioethics class is writing her dissertation on this subject. Whatever the rights and wrong of embryo selection, and I'm not even going to consider opening that particular can of worms, it does shine a light into the dark corners of society's attitudes towards disability and whose lives are worth saving or destroying. Basically here we have a deaf couple, already with a deaf daughter, who would prefer any other child also to be deaf. If they were a hearing family in the same position, there would be no problem, it seems in discarding an embryo which would be deemed "defective" if the child would be deaf. Implicit to this situation then is the assumption that a life of deafness is worth less than a life of hearing!

ocampo Wrote:

This article has been worded in a way that I think insinuates the couple only want a deaf child, not that they have expressed a mere preference. I can't see anything where they say, or hint at, aborting/abadoning a child that is found to not be deaf. They are entitled to express their personal preference.
This part that disgusted me though (in bold):

Quote:

'Paula is now in her early 40s,' says Lichy. 'Our first daughter was born naturally, but due to Paula's age, we may need IVF for the second.' The trouble is that, according to clause 14/4/9 of the bill, the selection of a hearing child through IVF is permitted, but embryos found to have deafness genes will be automatically discarded. 'This sends out a clear and direct message that the government thinks deaf people are better off not being born,' says Steve Emery, a sign-language expert at Heriot-Watt University.

I don't think this bill specifically targets 'deafness' only - I wonder how many other disabilities are targeted...

From what I know of this case, and I think this is the one my friend has been looking at, the couple do in fact want to select a deaf child through IVF. They are basing their case on the fact that is indeed routine for an embryo with the deafness gene to be discarded. What they are saying is that for them deafness is normal and desirable, and if an embryo is detected with that gene then that embryo is the one they would want to be implanted. What the state is saying is that you are allowed to discard/destroy an embryo which will become a deaf child, but you are not allowed to chose to have that embryo implanted.

So the technology is there to detect the gene, but the technology can only be used to ensure that a deaf child is not born!

Pages: 1 2

Marcia

Marcia