ethical questions re: CI

[blakey]

one scenario: deaf parents have a congenitally deaf child. parents oppose CI, which is low risk procedure that almost always enables people to hear--especially if done at an early enuf age.

2nd scenario:deaf parents have a young child w/normal hearing. the parents' culture has helped them to live full, rewarding lives. they want to put plugs in his ears to enable child to acquire their deaf culture.

questions?
Is it permissible to allow a person to retain a remediable disability if it coincides w/parental wishes and beliefs? Is there a moral difference between allowing a disability and inducing or causing it?

Do such wishes and beliefs have greater force if they are associated w/a culture? if so, how does being associated w/a culture make such a difference? would this apply equally to ALL cultures, or only to some?


Remmy--this is not opinion--k? lokk at these scenarios morally and ethically; put differences aside, and tell me what u think.

 

[Banjo]

one scenario: deaf parents have a congenitally deaf child. parents oppose CI, which is low risk procedure that almost always enables people to hear--especially if done at an early enuf age.

I strongly believe in parental rights, especially when it come to children with disabilities. The parents should make the decision on if to put their child through a surgery or not. It's quite simple why I believe in parental rights is because the parents have to be prepared to face the challenges and responsibilities, especially when a cochlear implantation is involved. Cochlear Implantation requires a lot of parental involvement and not all parents are willing to go through with that. Therefore, they are given the choices.

2nd scenario:deaf parents have a young child w/normal hearing. the parents' culture has helped them to live full, rewarding lives. they want to put plugs in his ears to enable child to acquire their deaf culture.

Now, this is pretty much a no-brainer. A child shouldn't be forced into wearing earplugs just because their parents are deaf. If the child is hearing, then that's the way it is. One could use the same argument with a deaf child, but a deaf child is missing one of the 5 senses. The hearing child isn't.

Is it permissible to allow a person to retain a remediable disability if it coincides w/parental wishes and beliefs? Is there a moral difference between allowing a disability and inducing or causing it?

Oh, I believe that causing a child to become disabled on purpose is wrong. Very wrong and anybody who dare to do such a thing should be put in jail. Forcing the parents to implant the child with a cochlear implant against their wishes is also very wrong.

Do such wishes and beliefs have greater force if they are associated w/a culture? if so, how does being associated w/a culture make such a difference? would this apply equally to ALL cultures, or only to some?

As long these wishes and beliefs don't put the children's lives in a dangerous position... they should be fine. For example, if a child need blood to survive, but the parent refuses to allow any blood to enter its body... that's where the parental rights stop. No child should be allowed to die because of a parent's personal belief.

 

[blakey]

thank u thank u thank u for responding! pls give me more info if u have it