Genetically creating deaf children

shel90 said:
In terms of making their child to be like them, there is no difference.

However, after the babies' condition are medically alternated, there is one difference that can occur....

Hearing people use medical technology to make their deaf child hearing..if it works, great! If not, what happens? Lanugage and communication starts to become a barrier and the child become delayed in language development if no other intervention is provided.

Deaf people create deaf babies...deaf babies are exposed to ASL since birth and u got natural language and communication happening. Even if deaf people have hearing children, hearing children are able to learn ASL and still acquire a language.

Not saying that it is ok to create deaf babies but u asked what was the difference, in my point of view that is the difference.

That is where most of my concerns regarding to CIs and other medical techniques to make the children "hear" come in..I dont want their language development to be compromised due to focusing so much time on speech therapy rather than language acquistion if the child has difficulty picking up the cues of spoken language.

Call me wrong or whatever but that is what I see at my work. Kids coming to my school from public schools so language delayed because their ability to pick up on spoken language wasnt successful. I just think that is plain wrong...the child pays for the consequences having to suffer in trying to learn language and then having to learn how to read and write at such a late age.
Click to expand...

Excellent points, shel. Just like any assistive listening devise that has been used in the past--HA, FM system, now CI--the focus for the child is on training them to use what residual hearing that is useful to develop auditory/ oral skills, rather than providing the environment that permits natural language development. Because the child does not use the assistive devise naturally, and must be trained to use it, valuable time is wasted that could be better utilized by providing an environment allowing for natural language development and preventing the delays that are far too common--and in my opinion unneccessary--in deaf children. It should be language first, mode second. Unfortunately, it is usually the reverse. Mode is determined first, and language follows.
 
Hear Again said:
Not all Deaf people know or choose to use ASL. Some Deaf people are raised orally (speechreading). If a Deaf baby were raised in an oral environment, there is just as much of a chance of language delay occurring as there is for a Deaf baby implanted with a CI that does not work as expected.
Click to expand...

True, but I believe in the case of creating deaf babies, this is happening with Deaf couples who want children they can raise like them, in their culture. So ordinarily yes, of course this is a problem but I think the genetically modified babies would definitely be growing up Deaf and using ASL.

Although the idea of Deaf people choosing to modify their baby so it becomes deaf is hard to swallow, I would find it REALLY bizarre if it were a hearing couple or oral deaf couple who chose to do that.
 
Interpretrator said:
True, but I believe in the case of creating deaf babies, this is happening with Deaf couples who want children they can raise like them, in their culture. So ordinarily yes, of course this is a problem but I think the genetically modified babies would definitely be growing up Deaf and using ASL.

Although the idea of Deaf people choosing to modify their baby so it becomes deaf is hard to swallow, I would find it REALLY bizarre if it were a hearing couple or oral deaf couple who chose to do that.
Click to expand...

My point exactly. Before, when I learned ASL, the thought of having a deaf baby was a like a nightmare to me. I havent met any oral deaf people who wouldnt mind having deaf kids so I bet most oral deaf people wouldnt go out of their way to create a deaf child.
 
shel90 said:
My point exactly. Before, when I learned ASL, the thought of having a deaf baby was a like a nightmare to me. I havent met any oral deaf people who wouldnt mind having deaf kids so I bet most oral deaf people wouldnt go out of their way to create a deaf child.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree about, "most" but suppose there's 10, 20% of those who would, wouldn't that be scary?
 
Tousi said:
Yeah, I agree about, "most" but suppose there's 10, 20% of those who would, wouldn't that be scary?
Click to expand...

I have met some "oral" deaf people who were born to "oral" deaf parents. Those people are now wanting to learn ASL and have expressed their wishes that their parents accept sign language. I find that very interesting!
 
shel90 said:
I have met some "oral" deaf people who were born to "oral" deaf parents. Those people are now wanting to learn ASL and have expressed their wishes that their parents accept sign language. I find that very interesting!
Click to expand...

Shel,

This is a good point and something I didn't consider. :)
 
Contradictory feelings are simmering inside my heart. I resent all romanticized and glamorized notions about deafness in related to ASL and the U.S. Deaf culture. For all the silver spoons we have here, we still run into the glass ceiling in many professional situations. I'll never let go of the concept of working twice hard as my average college-educated hearing peers do and will have to figure out how to be smart so I don't burn out early.

And yet I also resent the old-school belief about the inferiority of deaf people. In many countries, deaf people CANNOT be teachers for the deaf because the government doesn't support the idea. I find it inconceivable to live in a society like that. Even though the discrimination in the U.S. is more subtle and softer, I don't want to settle down for what I already have. I don't want to be the elephant in the room, I want to establish my worthy presence and make myself seen and heard. I believe I have a lot to give to the world. Just like everybody else.

For any child of mine, deaf, hearing or else, I'd want her to be happy and to feel free to do anything like the world is her own oyster without severe consequences. As a parent, I'd do everything in my power to give her to make the most and best out of her life.

Ambiguous answer, as I have said nothing about the possibility of creating deaf babies from the beginning or giving them cochlear implants (assuming I give birth to one because my deafness is genetic). The future is clear as mud.
 
That is an interesting statement. If i get your meaning that would be the same as me, a hearing person, saying the same about English which is my primary form of communication. I don't quite understand why you would think that about ASL since communication is so essental to us as human beings. Could you elaborate on that further so i have a better understanding?
 
I don't think that deafness should be a choice made by parents of the would-be kids.
 
I believe another poster may have already said this, but if I ever found out that my parents deliberately caused my deafness (I'm late deafened, but you get the point), I'd be livid!!! :pissed:
 
Last edited:
shel90 said:
My point exactly. Before, when I learned ASL, the thought of having a deaf baby was a like a nightmare to me. I havent met any oral deaf people who wouldnt mind having deaf kids so I bet most oral deaf people wouldnt go out of their way to create a deaf child.
Click to expand...

Well when we went through the IVF process to have our child (my husband has male infertility) we were offered a process called preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) which could screen our embryos for the syndrome that resulted in my deafness, the idea being that the "deaf" embryos would be discarded and the "hearing" ones only transferred. My answer was an immediate "no".

I'm "oral deaf" (I suppose) but there was no way I was going to decide that a deaf embryo wasn't good enough for us. For me all the embryos were equal in value. As it happened we gave birth to a hearing child from that process.

I think that those who deliberately create a deaf child probably use the same process in IVF. So they reject the "hearing embryos" and choose to transfer the "deaf" ones. I personally wouldn't do it and I believe it's ethically wrong but I kind of understand. I think that such parents probably worry that a hearing child will just take off and leave them for the hearing world whereas a deaf one would stick around and be part of their culture. I've seen hearing parents of deaf children have the same fears - they think the child will reject them and they will lose them to the deaf culture. Its no different.
 
R2D2 said:
Well when we went through the IVF process to have our child (my husband has male infertility) we were offered a process called preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) which could screen our embryos for the syndrome that resulted in my deafness, the idea being that the "deaf" embryos would be discarded and the "hearing" ones only transferred. My answer was an immediate "no".

I'm "oral deaf" (I suppose) but there was no way I was going to decide that a deaf embryo wasn't good enough for us. For me all the embryos were equal in value. As it happened we gave birth to a hearing child from that process.

I think that those who deliberately create a deaf child probably use the same process in IVF. So they reject the "hearing embryos" and choose to transfer the "deaf" ones. I personally wouldn't do it and I believe it's ethically wrong but I kind of understand. I think that such parents probably worry that a hearing child will just take off and leave them for the hearing world whereas a deaf one would stick around and be part of their culture. I've seen hearing parents of deaf children have the same fears - they think the child will reject them and they will lose them to the deaf culture. Its no different.
Click to expand...

Yea..those are understandable fears.
 
R2D2 said:
I think that those who deliberately create a deaf child probably use the same process in IVF. So they reject the "hearing embryos" and choose to transfer the "deaf" ones.
Click to expand...

That's an interesting perspective. I think what the original article is talking about was one step past that (actually altering genetic code to produce deafness), but that's an even trickier situation in my opinion. Where IS that ethical line drawn?
 
Hm, looks to me it is a case of bad wording and "journal sensationalism".

The article from the OP does use the word "create" but really nothing on, you know, actually creating deaf or dwarf babies. The dwarf couple in the article had a homozygous andro baby which is lethal- this baby is born dead or dies soon after birth & is incurable. They wanted to prevent that from happening again so they wanted to screen for either a non-dwarf(?) or a heterozygous dwarf. Both of which are fully capable of living healthy lives. The word they should have been using throughout was screen. The eggs were fertilized and allowed to grow naturally and then they did genetic testing on each embryo before the embryos were put in the mother. That's it. No deliberate altering of the genes implied in the thread title or in some of the responses to "make a deaf baby out of a hearing baby".

Should a deaf or dwarf person be allowed to marry and have kids? As in have kids the "natural" way, via good 'ol bed bouncing.
 
cathartes said:
Hm, looks to me it is a case of bad wording and "journal sensationalism".

The article from the OP does use the word "create" but really nothing on, you know, actually creating deaf or dwarf babies. The dwarf couple in the article had a homozygous andro baby which is lethal- this baby is born dead or dies soon after birth & is incurable. They wanted to prevent that from happening again so they wanted to screen for either a non-dwarf(?) or a heterozygous dwarf. Both of which are fully capable of living healthy lives. The word they should have been using throughout was screen. The eggs were fertilized and allowed to grow naturally and then they did genetic testing on each embryo before the embryos were put in the mother. That's it. No deliberate altering of the genes implied in the thread title or in some of the responses to "make a deaf baby out of a hearing baby".

Should a deaf or dwarf person be allowed to marry and have kids? As in have kids the "natural" way, via good 'ol bed bouncing.
Click to expand...

Screening is done all the time to check for genetic mutations and abnormalities in cases where there is strong suspicion or probability. The mother then has the option of choosing abortion rather than carrying the child to term. It's a personal decision and based on one's own personal ethics and sense of morality. But as other's have said, this is different than intentional creation.
 
You did a good thing.

If I had to choose between the three... deaf child, hearing child, or either... I'd pick hearing or either, but not deaf. Picking either is like going with the flow and letting it happen. Picking hearing is like picking a child that's not deaf. However, picking a deaf child is like making sure your newborn is handicapped and that might cause some frustration for that child in the future.

I would be upset if I found out that my mom did everything in her power to make sure I was deaf.
 
Back
Top