Deaf demand right to designer deaf children - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

photon · 12-23-2007, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Disability charities say this makes the proposed legislation discriminatory, because it gives parents the right to create “designer babies” free from genetic conditions while banning couples from deliberately creating a baby with a disability.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle3087367.ece

Seriously, wtf.. What parent would want their kid to have that kind of disadvantage?

Though this does raise some other questions.. if knowingly choosing an embryo that has hearing problems isn't legal/ethical/whatever, what about when we know so much more about genetics that we could tell that a child from parent A and parent B would result in child C that had difficulty XYZ. Do we make it illegal for them to have a child?

They mention a case where a deaf couple chose sperm from someone with a heavy family history of deafness in order to have a kid that was deaf. If we disallow that, what about that same guy donating his sperm the old fashioned way, where they know the kid is gonna probably be deaf? Should that be disallowed too?

Like if it was known the child would for sure get Down Syndrome if parent A and parent B had a child? Do you restrict them? What if its 90% chance? 50%? 20%? Tough questions.

blankall · 12-23-2007, 06:22 PM

Its kind of bizarre. Deaf people have now pushed forward the notion that they do not suffer from a disability. Instead they are born into a different culture. A deaf culture. So things like sign language etc. define it.

Some of them are quite militant about it too. Pretty crazy, but I do see where they are coming from. Not sure how ethical it is to purposely take away a child's ability to hear though.

McG · 12-23-2007, 06:49 PM

i'm dumbfounded quite honestly by "designing children".

the greatest gift on this planet is life itself...and that's not enough for some folk.

Resolute 14 · 12-23-2007, 09:27 PM

Simply put, the wannabe parents have exactly zero "rights" in this case. It is the child's rights that matter, and any person who wishes to deliberately inflict a disability on a child should be summarily sterilized.

REDVAN · 12-24-2007, 01:32 AM

I think it's interesting that the issue of deafness not being a disability is raised. I would disagree with that, but I understand where it's coming from. This is such a sticky situation, I would have to spend a lot of time examining it to give a better opinion!

FireFly · 12-24-2007, 07:13 AM

I think two deaf parents raising a non-deaf child would be hard. Where is the child going to learn to speak? It's primary caregivers would never actually talk to it... It would be years before the child learns a language other than sign.

Resolute 14 · 12-24-2007, 08:00 AM

In that case, one would hope that the child isn't living in a bubble. There surely would be other family and friends that could help provide a stimulating environment for the kid.

Bobblehead · 12-24-2007, 08:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FireFly

I think two deaf parents raising a non-deaf child would be hard. Where is the child going to learn to speak? It's primary caregivers would never actually talk to it... It would be years before the child learns a language other than sign.

True, but you see immigrant children learn english from TV and pre-school. Initially it would be tougher, but kids are really flexible.

FireFly · 12-24-2007, 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

In that case, one would hope that the child isn't living in a bubble. There surely would be other family and friends that could help provide a stimulating environment for the kid.

True, but when your primary caregivers, the ones you're with 95% of the time can't speak to you or hear you cry, it definitely affects your own language skills.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

True, but you see immigrant children learn english from TV and pre-school. Initially it would be tougher, but kids are really flexible.

Yes, they are. I guess the point though is that why wouldn't deaf people want to or be able to make things easier for them, if those who aren't hearing impared can as well? Isn't that the goal of designer children?

Resolute 14 · 12-24-2007, 09:04 AM

I think there is a considerable difference in wanting to re-design a kid to remove a genetic defect, and wanting to add one. The second simply smacks of deaf wannabe-parents being to friggen lazy to deal with something they find challenging - i.e.: helping a "normal" child learn to talk.

FireFly · 12-24-2007, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

I think there is a considerable difference in wanting to re-design a kid to remove a genetic defect, and wanting to add one. The second simply smacks of deaf wannabe-parents being to friggen lazy to deal with something they find challenging - i.e.: helping a "normal" child learn to talk.

And it doesn't smack of the same in reverse? Life threatening illnesses, sure. Remove those. But there's nothing stopping them from removing genetic defects that make it easier for 'normal' parents to deal with challenging things.

CaramonLS · 12-24-2007, 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FireFly

And it doesn't smack of the same in reverse? Life threatening illnesses, sure. Remove those. But there's nothing stopping them from removing genetic defects that make it easier for 'normal' parents to deal with challenging things.

Is that really what this is about or is it about giving the child the best life possible? I honestly thought it was about the latter.

Making sure your child doesn't get cancer when he/she is 60 years old/making your kid look better/more athletic probably does absolutely nothing to improve the life of the parents.

Table 5 · 12-24-2007, 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FireFly

I guess the point though is that why wouldn't deaf people want to or be able to make things easier for them, if those who aren't hearing impared can as well? Isn't that the goal of designer children?

How exactly does taking away their hearing make it easier for their child when it steps out into the real world?

Any parent who would want to do this is simply being selfish....which is not the best trait to have when you're trying to raise a child.

FireFly · 12-24-2007, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

Is that really what this is about or is it about giving the child the best life possible? I honestly thought it was about the latter.

Making sure your child doesn't get cancer when he/she is 60 years old/making your kid look better/more athletic probably does absolutely nothing to improve the life of the parents.

Do you think handicapped children are sad? Do you think they don't enjoy life? What ever happened to receiving graciously what was given to you?

I'm not saying I agree with the deaf people here, folks, I'm saying there are two sides to every story. Perhaps deaf people think their lives are better than ours because they don't have to hear all the junk we do? Some days I'd rather be deaf.

Table 5 · 12-24-2007, 11:00 AM

so what if that kids dream is be a musician or an opera singer? The point of parenthood is to raise your children to become solid citizens who live up to their full potential. What parent doesn't want more for their kids than they had?

If it's all about protecting them, then hell, why not poke out their eyeballs too so they don't have to see all the horrible things in this world too. Or maybe chop off their arms, so they dont have to shake hands and catch germs.

Life is tough enough with all your senses intact. Why make it tougher?

FireFly · 12-24-2007, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Table 5

so what if that kids dream is be a musician or an opera singer? The point of parenthood is to raise your children to become solid citizens who live up to their full potential. What parent doesn't want more for their kids than they had?

If it's all about protecting them, then hell, why not poke out their eyeballs too so they don't have to see all the horrible things in this world too. Or maybe chop off their arms, so they dont have to shake hands and catch germs.

Life is tough enough with all your senses intact. Why make it tougher?

Basically what you're saying is we should all engineer our children to be beautiful, smart and disease free? Why stop at disease free? If the point is to make your child's life easy, give them brains and looks too!

Table 5 · 12-24-2007, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FireFly

Basically what you're saying is we should all engineer our children to be beautiful, smart and disease free? Why stop at disease free? If the point is to make your child's life easy, give them brains and looks too!

Uh no. I'm against taking AWAY positive qualities they already have, not giving them new better ones.

wanna try again?

FireFly · 12-24-2007, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Table 5

Uh no. I'm against taking AWAY positive qualities they already have, not giving them new better ones.

wanna try again?

I already did. I asked you if you really thought that handicapped children were sad. Honestly here, it's not about their "quality of living" because MANY of them have fantastic lives. It's about parents who don't want to deal with it.

Table 5 · 12-24-2007, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FireFly

I already did. I asked you if you really thought that handicapped children were sad. Honestly here, it's not about their "quality of living" because MANY of them have fantastic lives. It's about parents who don't want to deal with it.

Actually, you asked someone else, but i digress...

I don't think handicapped children are necessarly sad, but why on earth would you want to take AWAY an amazing quality like the sense of hearing? That child's ability to be moved by music, to play an instrument, to hear someone they love laugh....all that taken away because of selfishness on the parents part. If you want to teach them about the joys of simplicity, take away a kid's Playstation, not their sense of hearing.

Are you happy watching a movie on mute?

FireFly · 12-24-2007, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Table 5

Actually, you asked someone else, but i digress...

I don't think handicapped children are necessarly sad, but why on earth would you want to take AWAY an amazing quality like the sense of hearing? That child's ability to be moved by music, to play an instrument, to hear someone they love laugh....all that taken away because of selfishness on the parents part. If you want to teach them about the joys of simplicity, take away a kid's Playstation, not their sense of hearing.

Are you happy watching a movie on mute?

I'm not saying it should be done. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but to say you're taking away a good thing, when you're saying it's okay to take away 'bad' genes... How is never knowing sickness a good thing? You have to experience great sadness to experience great joy.

I don't think there should be ANY genetic engineering. I'm saying the deaf have a point.