Deaf "culture"

[Caligastia]

I saw this show on pbs last night about this deaf couple who wont allow their child to get a cochlear implant which would allow her to hear and learn to speak because they are afraid she would lose her "deaf culture"!

To me this is child abuse. These parents are forcing a disability on their child simply because they dont know what she and they are missing! They need to accept the fact that deafness is a disability and not a "culture" .

Here is a link:
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/soundandfury/culture/index.html

 

[muppet]

It is quite disgusting isn't it?

I think all non-deaf would agree that it is child abuse - morally. Unfortunately, legally, the parents have the ultimate decision making ability. Isn't there a department of child welfare that can override parental decisions of this sort?

Incidentally, there is a "deaf" culture, within the definition of culture, while "deafness" is also a disability.

 

[Drekken]

Thanks to Liberalism, stupid crap like this happens. I guess woe to the person who is perfectly healthy and has all their abilities.

 

[Mao Tse Tung]

thats just ****ing wrong!my sisters were born deaf,but earlier this year they got the cochlear implant.i think this kinda thing shouldnt b allowed,if they can afford it they should have to get the implant for their children.those r just my 2 cents.

 

[Simon Darkshade]

This is child abuse, plain and simple. Forcing someone to be disabled when there is an alternative is very naughty in my view.

 

[kobayashi]

Originally posted by Caligastia
I saw this show on pbs last night about this deaf couple who wont allow their child to get a cochlear implant which would allow her to hear and learn to speak because they are afraid she would lose her "deaf culture"!

To me this is child abuse. These parents are forcing a disability on their child simply because they dont know what she and they are missing! They need to accept the fact that deafness is a disability and not a "culture" .

Here is a link:
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/soundandfury/culture/index.html

I saw the exact same show a few months ago and had exactly the same reaction. The stupid thing was that the deaf parents understood that other forms of hadicap like being wheelchari bound were not a culture (from the heated arguement with the grandfather in the kitchen) but still insisted that deafness was.

 

[andycapp]

I totally agree with all the posters criticising this situation and I am wondering by "culture" whether the parents are referring to their sign language and all the associated implications this has when discussing a language and its centrality to their culture - just a thought.

 

[Hamlet]

This is abolutely terrible. I'm afraid I fear the child will not thank them for this decision when it is older. They are very, very selfish in my opinion.

The extremities that you could take their argument to also clearly highlights it as what it is - nonsense.

On a side note,

"Thanks to Liberalism, stupid crap like this happens."

I thought conservatives would be all in favour of letting people handle their family in the way they wished?

 

[Sodapop]

I saw the same thing a year ago, and though I agree with all of you (I was very frustrated when I first saw it), I think someone will have to point out how it will be hard for the child to learn to live with the new situation.

You need to know what the situation would be if the child had a cochlear implant. She wouldn't be able to talk to her parents because they wouldn't hear her, and that's hard to learn to speak when the one's who are the people you see the most can't even understand you, and can't answer you.

But it is also true that there should be a law or something to force those parents to accept a cochlear implant. If things continue this way, the child won't be able to study with "normal" child, and will be excluded from the society in general. In fact, if I remember well, the grandparents were trying to convince the parents to accept cochlear implant. And the child herself was willing to have a cochlear implant.

That is not acceptable. In fact, it's our duty to try to convince (or force) those parents that it would be the best thing. Not for us, who probably won't see her in our life, not for the people who are around her, but for the child, who has the right to be include in society, the right to be equal to others, the right to hear what's going on.

Please do not flame me, the small paragraph was not to defend the parents, but to reprensent that would be hard for the child too, assuming she get this cochlear implant one day, if it's not too late.

 

[knowltok3]

This reminds me of the other thread Caligastia posted about the couple who wasn't allowed to adopt the black baby because of culture. Wrong there, wrong here. This notion that people should instill culture in their children by any means is repugnant. The child will get what culture they are exposed to and should have the chance to develop with all available opportunities.

We are taking culture too far and using it as a divisive force. The problems in the former Yugoslavia highlight what can happen when people go too far with holding their culture sacred. This is not a call for uniformity, but rather tolerance. Keeping artificial barriers between cultures causes problems, removing those barriers allows for understanding and cultural sharing.

 

[Caligastia]

Once again the Civfanatics have shown themselves to be far more intelligent than those at Apolyton. Unbelievably there are many at apolyton who support the deaf parents decision.

I guess thats why I still go to Apolyton, for the comical loonies...

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=39492

 

[Simon Darkshade]

I read through the corresponding Poly thread and , what a bunch of strange opinions. They succeeded into turning the issue into one of "government = bad", home schooling and circumcision fairly quickly, causing no real surprise.
It does boggle ones mind that there are actually people out there who think like that, and equate the sensible option in this situation to Nazi policy.

More fruitcake, anyone?

 

[DinoDoc]

Pardon me while I interupt this mutual admiration party but let me transplant one of my posts here to get an actual discussion going:

Originally posted by DinoDoc
The point is that children lack the mental capacity to make informed decisions about submitting themselves to invasive surgery and that parents are the people that have been traditionally entrusted with that responsibility. You're going to have to meet a high burden before you can override that little bit of freedom and the fact that you simply don't like thier decision doesn't cut it. Histrionics notwithstanding.

 

[Simon Darkshade]

Who invited you in, pilgrim

The point that everyone seems to be miffed about here is not whether the child should decide for themselves, but that some concept called "deaf culture" was used as the excuse not to.

And the arguments over various semantics basically ignore the fact that a child should not be deprived of the right to hear, and to fully experience life. This is a reponsibility that parents have to fulfill, not an infringement upon their beloved freedoms to do whatever they see fit.

To me, it is only a degree of difference between keeping a child in silence, and locking it up in its own waste, or beating it. All are abuse of some kind.

Now sir, if you do not have an invitation, I must insist that you leave, or I will be forced to run away weeping!

 

[kobayashi]

Originally posted by Unknown soldier
I saw the same thing a year ago, and though I agree with all of you (I was very frustrated when I first saw it), I think someone will have to point out how it will be hard for the child to learn to live with the new situation.

You need to know what the situation would be if the child had a cochlear implant. She wouldn't be able to talk to her parents because they wouldn't hear her, and that's hard to learn to speak when the one's who are the people you see the most can't even understand you, and can't answer you....

not a flame...but as you recall, there were two schools featured. One was a childrens school for the plain deaf children and a second school was for the deaf children with cochlear implants. Also, the child already knew sign language from young so she could still communicate with the parents. As a matter of fact, IIRC the deaf parents parents also knew sign language.

 

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Simon Darkshade
The point that everyone seems to be miffed about here is not whether the child should decide for themselves, but that some concept called "deaf culture" was used as the excuse not to.

What ecactly would be the difference if they had said that they felt the risks of invasive surgery were to great to force upon thier child rather than refering to the amorphous concept of "deaf culture?" The result for the child would be the exact same in both cases.

And the arguments over various semantics basically ignore the fact that a child should not be deprived of the right to hear, and to fully experience life.

What the arguements miss is that the child lacks the capacity to give informed consent. This is a reponsibility that parents have to fulfill, not an excuse for the State to butt in and do whatever it sees fit.

 

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by DinoDoc


What ecactly would be the difference if they had said that they felt the risks of invasive surgery were to great to force upon thier child rather than refering to the amorphous concept of "deaf culture?" The result for the child would be the exact same in both cases.

True, it doesnt make any difference to me because both reasons are not good enough. This surgery is not considered "risky" by any stretch of the imagination.

Originally posted by DinoDoc

What the arguements miss is that the child lacks the capacity to give informed consent. This is a reponsibility that parents have to fulfill, not an excuse for the State to butt in and do whatever it sees fit.

How informed does the child have to be? If the child wants to correct a severely limiting birth defect with surgery I dont see a problem.

 

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Simon Darkshade
More fruitcake, anyone?

 

[Simon Darkshade]

RE: Fruitcake
Plenty of helpings, and some are home delivery

"What ecactly would be the difference if they had said that they felt the risks of invasive surgery were to great to force upon thier child rather than refering to the amorphous concept of "deaf culture?" The result for the child would be the exact same in both cases."

The difference is that one is somewhere approaching borderline legitimacy and the other is a crackpot theory that reeks of weirdness.
Most surgery is invasive, but this is surgery that benefits the child. I cannot understand how a parent would choose to limit their childs experience of life in such a manner. I can understand concern, which is natural for someone one loves, but I do not approve whatsoever of this rampant abuse of the responsibility of parenthood.

"What the arguements miss is that the child lacks the capacity to give informed consent. This is a reponsibility that parents have to fulfill, not an excuse for the State to butt in and do whatever it sees fit."

Certainly, the child cannot be expected to understand fully the complexity of the situation, and the parent is there to exercise that responsibility in their stead; EXERCISE this responsibility, not ABUSE it.

 

[Zwelgje]

I'm really amazed that so many of you think that the parents are wrong by not letting their child have cochlear implants.

It is the first time you have seen this family and not even in real life but on television. Still you think you can make better decisions for this child than the parents can. Come on people, you don't know what is best for this child, you don't even know the child! Only the closest family (the parents) know what is best for their child. The parents have the same disability and they managed to build up a life, they even found somebody to start a family with...