Ethical dilemma
Would be interested to know what Carl thinks of this. The story is of a deaf couple who if they opt to have a child by IVF will be forced to have a child that is hearing if the selection of embryos on offer has one that is hearing. They say they would rather have a deaf child.
Julian Savulescu, director of the Oxford Centre of Applied Ethics says
"Given that we are looking at such at a very small number of people, I think we can afford to be quite liberal about this. Deafness is a disability, but it is not one that stops people having a life that's worth living - and if there are a handful of people out there who want a deaf child, they can find a doctor who will help them, and they are prepared to pay for it, then so be it."
Hmm, I'm not sure I agree. What do you think?
Labels: disability, ethics, news
posted by Helsalata @ 5:35 pm
2 comments
2 Comments:
I'm by no means qualified to comment, however, I have been reading about a subsection of circumcised men who have grown up to heavily resent their parent's decision when they had no say in it.
I'm thinking that if these guys feel so strongly about something that's relatively minor (ok - your mileage may vary on that one :) ), then what is the deaf kid gonna think when he grows up to find out the decision their parents made.
Of course, this is a flawed way of thinking - that child would have been otherwise discarded, and so could very possibly be grateful. I don't know, the fact that they're going out of their way to have a deaf child bothers me, but that's obviously because I'm not in touch with the deaf culture and can only see from the perspective of someone who can already hear.
So yeah - difficult one!
Strikes me as a convenience baby - same if they wanted to go for a hearing baby. There's no way to make the right decision which makes me think that possibly the choice shouldn't be made available at all
Post a Comment
<< Home