Deaf demand right to designer deaf children

Eve said:
So, the parents of a deaf child didn't chose for them to be deaf, but they do have the choice to implant....what's the difference? I just don't think we need to be playing God here.
Click to expand...

I agree with u there. I dont like the idea of creating designer babies but I can undy from the deaf people's perspective about having the same rights.
 
Eve said:
So, the parents of a deaf child didn't chose for them to be deaf, but they do have the choice to implant....what's the difference? I just don't think we need to be playing God here.
Click to expand...

One is genetic, one is surgical. A parent can't choose to have surgery to correct the sex of their baby after its born, either, but they can choose the sex prior to birth.
 
carrigantm9636 said:
I think if hearies can choose embryos based on whether they carry a hearing or deaf gene (as in, if they can choose hearing over deaf) then we should be able to choose deaf over hearing.

This same article came up in a different forum (livejournal) the other day and I thought the contrast between what D/deaf people feel about the issue and how hearing people see the issue was interesting/eye opening/partly sickening. Here is the link wtf_inc: Deaf demand right to designer deaf children The comments might make you mad-- they did me!-- but I think it's helpful to know what thinking is out there so we can combat it.
Click to expand...

Just the thought of reading all those replies makes me feel exhausted but yes, I think we should learn what sort of thinking is going on out there so it should be combated.
 
jillio said:
Absolutely!!!
Click to expand...

Agree with u, JIllo and Deafskeptic...

That was what happened with the utube comments...I got exhausted just from reading all the negative views on deafness and ASL.
 
shel90 said:
Agree with u, JIllo and Deafskeptic...

That was what happened with the utube comments...I got exhausted just from reading all the negative views on deafness and ASL.
Click to expand...

You and me both! It just got ridiculas.
 
I find this law disturbing- it infringes on a person's basic right to raising a family. As genetic testing is as common place as getting regular ultrasounds during pregnancy, these days, to say that one cannot select a deaf embryo is a highly effective way to prevent deaf people from existing. Last I checked, we call that genocide.
 
Aleser said:
I find this law disturbing- it infringes on a person's basic right to raising a family. As genetic testing is as common place as getting regular ultrasounds during pregnancy, these days, to say that one cannot select a deaf embryo is a highly effective way to prevent deaf people from existing. Last I checked, we call that genocide.
Click to expand...


Interesting point.
 
Well, I think that is a wishful thinking for wanting to have a deaf babies for Deaf parents. Like hearing parents, they want to have hearing children and when they find they have a deaf baby or any other disabilities born to babies, they get panic and try to fix us to be perfect or want us to hear. Remember in the movie on Children of Lesser God, Sarah wanted to have a deaf baby naturally and her live-in boyfriend who was hearing was not sure if he wanted to have a deaf child or baby. The point is that many of us, deafies, really would like to have a deaf baby so that we can be comfortable talking with sign language and not have to be ashame of being Deaf as who we are. I don't think it is genocide but hearing people try to fix us so we think it is genocide to try to make us hear by surgery with CI. There will be no sign language if we went through this surgery. The hearing authority will want oral all the way for CI or hearing aid children and adults (I am wearing one hearing aid on my left ear and I could not hear nothing on my right ear(no hearing aid). I don't want CI as it would be the same like using the hearing aid. That is why we need to fight for our rights to use ASL as it is very important to able to communicate in ASL as well as in oral. We need all of the communication like lipreading, speech (oral) and ASL. We don't want to use ORAL all the time twenty four hours a day and seven days a week. So don't tell us not to use ASL. This is our Deaf community and our Deaf Culture. If you don't understand, then that is too bad. Tough, that is your problem!!!! :ty:
 
Bebonang said:
I don't think it is genocide but hearing people try to fix us so we think it is genocide to try to make us hear by surgery with CI. There will be no sign language if we went through this surgery.
Click to expand...


There is a huge difference between trying to make a Deaf person hear and trying to deny a Deaf person's right to life.
 
Eh..that's plain wrong and it's scary.. you are supposed to accept the babies that God has created for y'all. Hmm..some ideas today in this world is going crazy! :ugh:
 
hello folks,

very much a newbie here so i thought id say hello.

My name is Fintan living in the UK and this article from the times news paper spreading mis information and how the artical came about.

Alison who is Deaf like me reads parliament bill and came across a bill about IVF and embrows.
she came across a section where people who have a disability are not allowed to have children or eggs which has any disability.
For example a deaf couple who go for an ivf the doctor finds that for example has 5 eggs you find that 4 eggs are deaf but one is hearing you are not allowed to have the deaf eggs only the hearing one so there fore the 4 eggs are destroyed!
can you imagine if all 5 eggs are deaf and told you are now allowed to have them or grow in your body?
the alternative is to have somone else egg or sperm.. would you want somone elses egg or sperm?


we know deaf is not life threatning compared to say a downs sydrome but why are we under that catorgry?

no uk deaf people prefer a deaf over a hearing one but if the eggs turned out to be all deaf should it be destroyed? why arent they allowed a life?

now back to the times artical we all talked about this and alison set up a website called http://stopeugenics.org
the times newspaper contacted her and twisted the story that we want deaf designer baby.

all we are asking to remove the clause so if we go for an ivf and turned out to be deaf let the parent have a choice to have them or not... not the government.
 
fgaughan said:
hello folks,

very much a newbie here so i thought id say hello.

My name is Fintan living in the UK and this article from the times news paper spreading mis information and how the artical came about.

Alison who is Deaf like me reads parliament bill and came across a bill about IVF and embrows.
she came across a section where people who have a disability are not allowed to have children or eggs which has any disability.
For example a deaf couple who go for an ivf the doctor finds that for example has 5 eggs you find that 4 eggs are deaf but one is hearing you are not allowed to have the deaf eggs only the hearing one so there fore the 4 eggs are destroyed!can you imagine if all 5 eggs are deaf and told you are now allowed to have them or grow in your body?
the alternative is to have somone else egg or sperm.. would you want somone elses egg or sperm?


we know deaf is not life threatning compared to say a downs sydrome but why are we under that catorgry?

no uk deaf people prefer a deaf over a hearing one but if the eggs turned out to be all deaf should it be destroyed? why arent they allowed a life?

now back to the times artical we all talked about this and alison set up a website called http://stopeugenics.org
the times newspaper contacted her and twisted the story that we want deaf designer baby.

all we are asking to remove the clause so if we go for an ivf and turned out to be deaf let the parent have a choice to have them or not... not the government.
Click to expand...

That is just horrible horrible!!!!!!

:rl::rl::rl::rl: to those who want to destroy us!
 
fgaughan said:
hello folks,

very much a newbie here so i thought id say hello.

My name is Fintan living in the UK and this article from the times news paper spreading mis information and how the artical came about.

Alison who is Deaf like me reads parliament bill and came across a bill about IVF and embrows.
she came across a section where people who have a disability are not allowed to have children or eggs which has any disability.
For example a deaf couple who go for an ivf the doctor finds that for example has 5 eggs you find that 4 eggs are deaf but one is hearing you are not allowed to have the deaf eggs only the hearing one so there fore the 4 eggs are destroyed!
can you imagine if all 5 eggs are deaf and told you are now allowed to have them or grow in your body?
the alternative is to have somone else egg or sperm.. would you want somone elses egg or sperm?


we know deaf is not life threatning compared to say a downs sydrome but why are we under that catorgry?

no uk deaf people prefer a deaf over a hearing one but if the eggs turned out to be all deaf should it be destroyed? why arent they allowed a life?

now back to the times artical we all talked about this and alison set up a website called http://stopeugenics.org
the times newspaper contacted her and twisted the story that we want deaf designer baby.

all we are asking to remove the clause so if we go for an ivf and turned out to be deaf let the parent have a choice to have them or not... not the government.
Click to expand...

Oh that's terrible!! HORRIBLE....... :pissed::pissed:

I never forgive the government for doing this!:rl::rl::rl:
 
Back
Top