Moral question

[Guest TheMikeSC]

For those who have not heard of this story, a deaf lesbian couple wanted a child.

 

To be precise, they wanted a DEAF child---so they actively sought out a deaf "father" to donate sperm so that they could try and make sure that their child is born deaf.

 

Now, what do all of you think of this?

 

I think it's borderline criminal to INTENTIONALLY try to give your child a disability and I'd like to believe that the state would remove the child from their custody and terminate their parental rights simply because these two women obviously don't care one bit for their child if they are STRIVING to see to it that it's born with a handicap.

                     -=Mike

[Guest Kahran Ramsus]

I don't think it is even borderline criminal.  It IS criminal.

[Guest]

I wrote a couple of things about this on another bulletin board, something like a month ago. I don't have anything new to add, so I'll just repost them here.

 

---

 

Marney - 07:48pm Apr 8, 2002 EST (#114 of 224)

Token Forum Chick

This is the really scary part: "The women, from Bethesda, Maryland, are both mental health therapists." This is one of the most sickening, delusional stories I've ever read in my life. Being deaf is a culture?! When the fuck did that happen? Deliberately imposing a handicap on a child is a "lifestyle choice?" I'm sure Helen Keller would have loved to have "heard" that one.

--------------------

D.Reynolds - 08:12pm Apr 8, 2002 EST (#115 of 224)

This is the way the world ends, This is the way the world ends, Not with a bang but a wimper. -T. S. Eliot

Maybe they should be "asked" to join the blind community, then see if they want a blind child to boot. :/ If they were born deaf then they don't know what they are missing in this world.

--------------------

Marney - 08:24pm Apr 8, 2002 EST (#116 of 224)

Token Forum Chick

Regardless, the point is it's not a cultural or racial choice, like being black; it's a disability. Deliberately imposing any disability on a child should be a serious crime (although I have no idea how you'd enforce something like that). For Chrissakes, it's the equivalent of lifelong torture. And why? Just so cretins like these can feel better about themselves? I know three deaf people (their spouses know ASL, obviously; I've been picking up bits and pieces here and there) and they don't make any bones about it. Just a couple of weeks ago we were mocking the absurd legalese that goes into things like the ADA - "differently abled" indeed. No, they're disabled, they're handicapped; and most of the handicapped people I know would be the first to admit it. They aren't in the same masochistic state of denial as this disgusting, immoral, completely fuckheaded couple.

I wonder if they'll manage to brainwash the children, or if they'll be able to see through the bullshit when they grow up, and give these two flaming idiots the hard backhands across the face they so richly deserve.

[Guest Risk]

I really hate this world.  It sickens me to see all the evil.

[Guest DragonflyKid]

How about the couples who take fertility drugs and end up having 8 children which are more prone to having birth defects, being born prematurely, dying at birth, etc. It should be a rule that is you aren't willing to go through selective reductioning you shouldn't be allowed to take the fertlity drugs in the first place.

[Guest Some Guy]

I think it is criminal to intentionally try to bring a disabled child in to this world.  Why would someone want to be so cruel?  If they do successfully have a deaf child they should be tried for cruelty to humans and put in prison for at least 30 years.

 

Rolling Chop, I agree with you.  I don't think fertilty drugs should be legal in the first place.  People should adopt if nature dictates that they can't reproduce.  There are many young children in America and the rest of the world who need a Mother and a Father to raise them.

[Guest converge241]

the deaf couple child gentically altering issue maddened me for two reasons:

 

1) i dont think its fair to the unborn child to alter him in anything other than a preventative way. the baby doesnt have a choice in being denied hearing. would one of them deafen themselves if they met the other partner? I doubt it (hey maybe they would I dont know).

 

2) so fine they go ahead and try it.. what if it screws up and the kids brain is destroyed/damaged? a high price to pay for designer babies

 

i would be hesitant at procedures that could say, prevent a defect in my child..even if i knew scientifically they do it all the time.

for example say i was going to have my wife give birth to a child that was going to have down syndrome and they have some new procedure that can prevent it before the birth.. i dont know if i would try it...id rather just love the child the way they were..sure id be more apt if they had some life-threatening affliction that they wanted to try and prevent..but even then it wouldnt be an easy decision

[Guest TheMikeSC]

How about the couples who take fertility drugs and end up having 8 children which are more prone to having birth defects, being born prematurely, dying at birth, etc. It should be a rule that is you aren't willing to go through selective reductioning you shouldn't be allowed to take the fertlity drugs in the first place. >>>

 

 

Can't agree here. If one feels that abortion is murder, one cannot do "selective reduction" morally.

 

I could argue against fertility drugs in the first place, but I'm too tired.

                   -=Mike

[Guest DrTom]

You can't choose your parents, and you can't choose whether or not to be disabled, but no one ever expects their parents to choose for them to be disabled.  This is such a crock of shit.  It also shows the negative side to the advances in genetics and reproductive science that we've made: imbeciles can inflict lifetime harm on their child just so they feel better about themselves and their "lifestyle."

 

People this stupid and cruel shouldn't be allowed to breed, even artificially.

[Guest RetroRob215]

For those who have not heard of this story, a deaf lesbian couple wanted a child.

 

To be precise, they wanted a DEAF child---so they actively sought out a deaf "father" to donate sperm so that they could try and make sure that their child is born deaf.

 

Now, what do all of you think of this?

 

I think it's borderline criminal to INTENTIONALLY try to give your child a disability and I'd like to believe that the state would remove the child from their custody and terminate their parental rights simply because these two women obviously don't care one bit for their child if they are STRIVING to see to it that it's born with a handicap.

                     -=Mike

I agree with everyone elses comments, but I think I can see where these 2 people might be coming from.  

 

I remember watching a video on deaf people.  One of people on the film talked about how people who are deaf and use sign language to communicate look down upon deaf people who get cochlear (sp?) implants.  These deaf people who sign believe that sign language is greater than spoken language because you can express yourself in more ways and combine different thoughts.  In the end, these deaf people are proud of being deaf and don't look at it as a disability, but as a gift.  I guess this couple wants to pass on that "gift" to their child.

 

In the end what they are doing is morally wrong, but I'm not so sure it will be easy to take the kid away from them.

[Guest Choken One]

I'm deaf. This is quite disturbing but A deaf man can't produce a deaf child just because he is deaf. (This was one of my biggest fears of my life, having my kid be deaf because of me)

 

 I don't consider being deaf a  "gift"...Thankfully, my parents gave a god damn and did not stick me to a deaf school and did not make me learn Sign Language.

 

 

  Cochlear is very dangerous. For people born deaf (such as myself)...it can be very dicey...to the point where I could wind up in worse shape then before and Thus losing my ability to have a hearing aid. I never went to a "special school"...I busted my ass off 5 days week for 3 hour speech sessions at 5 years old until I was 17, when the other kids were playing tag at the park.

 

Deafness is not a "gift"...There are no upsides to this...you have to pay more expenses. Blind People get Braile and that's all they have, other then dogs. So, while Deafness is not as highly damaging as blindness or retardation...

 

Deafness still presents alot of emotion damage...Kids look at you a little different, names are common place, stereotypes are prevalent in people's minds, I don't know how many times I've had to say "Huh?" or" What?" multiple times and seen people give up on trying to say it to me. How many awkward moments I've had when someone says something and I don't know what they said and I have to awkardly nod my head...who knows what they asked?

 

"Are you Gay?

nod.

 

'U eat shit?"

nod.

countless times.

 

Why do these bitches want to let another soul into that world...it's not a gift. It eats your wallet out. 5,000 for a hearing aid every 3 years (30,000 after eighteen years) pack of batteries, 8.49 a pack, two pack every 2 weeks (4,000 in eighteen years)...Ear surguries...about 6,000 per visits....(I've have about 11 operations....that's 66000)...so...because they wanted a deaf son...they spent over $100,000, which could have brought his college tuituion, new cars, pay your mortages, bills, debts....Why would they do that?

[Guest TheMikeSC]

After reading Choken One's comments, something entered my mind:

 

Would health insurance be required to pick up the tab for all of the obvious medical costs that the child will have (should the child be born deaf)? After all, if the parents SOUGHT to make the child deaf, couldn't they view it as a "pre-existing condition" (since the entire conception was based around passing on that trait) and not be a requirement for insurance companies to pay?

                           =-Mike

[Guest Choken One]

Recently, They have included deafness in health insurance but it's only for a small amount (7-21%) depending on the severity of the case. My father's work insurance would not cover that until they switched over when I was 14. My father used his money from Racing to pay for the surguries and stuff.

 

I do think that It should be picked up if it was a born-deaf case but in this situaton, these two girls CHOSE to have a deaf kid. My parents did not...so why should they have a health benifits.

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

Well golly gee, I thought it was a woman's right to choose. If she's allowed to suck it out of her womb at seven months with a vacuum cleaner, what's the big deal about trying to make the little bun in the oven deaf?

 

BTW: I can't wait to find out how they make this soon-to-be bundle of joy into a homosexual.

 

(If you take this post seriously, don't blame me)

[Guest]

Don't worry, I never take you seriously.

[Guest dreamer420]

That is kind of a disturbing news story and it is a good example of how the world is going to hell so fast.  Seriously, when was the last day that you haven't heard about some stupid fuck, doing something extreme, for no reason other than themselves?  I can't remember one.

[Guest RetroRob215]

Why do these bitches want to let another soul into that world...it's not a gift. It eats your wallet out. 5,000 for a hearing aid every 3 years (30,000 after eighteen years) pack of batteries, 8.49 a pack, two pack every 2 weeks (4,000 in eighteen years)...Ear surguries...about 6,000 per visits....(I've have about 11 operations....that's 66000)...so...because they wanted a deaf son...they spent over $100,000, which could have brought his college tuituion, new cars, pay your mortages, bills, debts....Why would they do that?

I think it all stems back to what I said earlier.  You were able to overcome deafness with speech therapy and hard work, whereas these two women MAY not of learned spoken english and MAY communicate through sign language.  

 

SOME people who communicate through sign language believe it is superior to spoken language for the reasons I listed above.  In the film I remember a guy signed an entire poem and went on to sign that the poem would'nt have had the same effect in words.  I guess we could compare these people who are against spoken language to those pyschos who drill holes in their foreheads believing it will make them superior beings.  Both groups of people, for whatever the reason, think that their ideas and beliefs are better than that of the rest of us, so they want to pass it on to their children.  

 

I remember the episode of ER when Dr. Benton's son was born. Benton wanted the baby to stay uncut because he was uncut.  The mother went ahead and got the baby circumsized anyway and he was very pissed off because his son was now at a disadvantage in his eyes.  I know the ramifications are both completely different, but the theory behind them may be the same.  Or maybe it's not and I'm just an idiot.

[Guest DrTom]

"Would health insurance be required to pick up the tab for all of the obvious medical costs that the child will have (should the child be born deaf)?"

 

FYI: the child was born with a small amount of hearing in one ear.  No indication yet whether that will lead to total deafness or not.  The sperm donor also suffered from congenital deafness.

[Guest J*ingus]

"SOME people who communicate through sign language believe it is superior to spoken language for the reasons I listed above.  In the film I remember a guy signed an entire poem and went on to sign that the poem would'nt have had the same effect in words."  

 

Why does this remind me about an old story I heard about a guy who'd had his right arm amputated, who was arguing in favor of left-handed bowling?  I mean, if you can't experience both spoken and sign language, you'd think it might be tough to decide which one was better.

[Guest]

If this child is purposely born deaf, then I would be glad to see the day when that child grows up and sues his/her asshole parents for forcing a disability on him/her.  That child will be forced to by hearing aides for the rest of his/her natural life which would but a financial strain on him/her.  Oh and a big "Get the Fuck off of my Planet!" to those parents!!

[Guest DrTom]

"If this child is purposely born deaf, then I would be glad to see the day when that child grows up and sues his/her asshole parents for forcing a disability on him/her."

 

We can hope.  I doubt it will happen, though.  I'm sure they'll integrate him into their "lifestyle" so fully, it won't matter, which is a shame.  I wouldn't object if he blew both their fool fucking heads off when he turned 18.

 

"Oh and a big "Get the Fuck off of my Planet!" to those parents!!"

 

I'd rather say, "Stay out of my gene pool!"  Every society needs cretins around for mockery, and these two adequately fit that bill.

[Guest big Dante Cruz]

Good mercy.  I am not going to come down on people that try to engineer their kids to have certain eyes and such.  I don't like it, but hell, I'm not going to come down on it right now.  I'm too tired.

 

I can understand preventative measures against genetic diseases or disabilities.

 

But to instill a disability on a child... we can only hope that the kid sues them, blows them away, whatever.  To rob them of what they never had because they're bitter about the whole ordeal is a damned fine way to make sure your child hates your guts.  I know we all want that.

[Guest]

Why not just adopted a deaf kid. Their are many kids that need adopting.

Yeah it is kinds of sick that they would seek out trying to create a kid that is deaf.

[Guest]

I have a disability and I firmly believe in embracing, accepting, and celebrating all the qualities, good or "bad" that make up your being.  That being said, I would NEVER impose, or let alone wish, a disability on someone else.  While you should accept the things you can't change, if you don't have to deal with something like this, all the better.  I can't see how anyone in their right mind would willingly force their children into something as life-changing as a disability.