The concept of selecting for a disability, and deafness in particular, has triggered a controversial and sometimes acrimonious debate between key stakeholders. Previous studies have concentrated on the views of the deaf and hard of hearing, health professionals and ethicists towards reproductive selection for deafness. This study, however, is the first of its kind examining the views of hearing children of deaf adults towards preimplantation genetic diagnosis and prenatal diagnosis to select for or against deafness. Hearing children of deaf adults (or CODAs, as they call themselves, and are widely known in the deaf community) straddle both the deaf and hearing worlds, and this dual perspective makes them ideally placed to add to the academic discourse concerning the use of genetic selection for or against deafness. The study incorporated two complementary stages, using initial, semistructured interviews with key informants (CODAs and health professionals) as a means to guide the subsequent development of an electronic survey, completed anonymously by 66 individuals. The participants shared many of the same views as deaf individuals in the D/deaf (or “culturally deaf”) community. The similarities extended to their opinions regarding deafness not being a disability (45.5% believed deafness was a distinct culture rather than a disability), their ambivalence towards having hearing or deaf children (72.3% indicated no preference) and their general disapproval of the use of genetic technologies to select either for or against deafness (60% believed that reproductive technologies, when used to select for or against deafness, should not be available to the community).
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Competing interests None.
MBD is an NHMRC practitioner fellow and RD is an NHMRC research fellow.
Provenance and Peer review not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Attitudes of deaf and hard of hearing subjects towards genetic testing and prenatal diagnosis of hearing loss
- Genetic information but not termination: pregnant women's attitudes and willingness to pay for carrier screening for deafness genes
- The best possible child
- Are attempts to have impaired children justifiable?
- When choosing the traits of children is hurtful to others
- Empowering the deaf. Let the deaf be deaf
- Discourses of prejudice in the professions: the case of sign languages
- There is a difference between selecting a deaf embryo and deafening a hearing child
- The child's right to an open future: is the principle applicable to non-therapeutic circumcision?
- Medical and bioethical considerations in elective cochlear implant array removal