During one of my post-graduate education classes, I watched a film in which the issue of cochlear implants for deaf children was beat to death like a red-headed horse by a pack of ravenous Frenchmen. I wanted to be deaf by the time the movie was over, just so I wouldn't have to listen to it any longer.
Right on the Left Coast has this post on the crux of the work -- that "deaf culture" is valid and needs protecting. I'm personally of the opinion that parents have the final say in whether invasive surgery is to be performed on their children. If deaf parents have a deaf child, and don't wish to put in the implant, no one, I think, has the right to compel them to do so. But, as providing for the needs of deaf children in education is a requirement upon the state, the state will be able to come up with a "compelling interest" to sue for it in court. Look for continuing legal hullabaloos.
By the same token, a set of hearing parents who wish to give the gift of hearing to their deaf child should be able to do so without self-important "deaf activists" trying to "defend their culture." Let me be plain: I care not a whit about "deaf culture," whatever that might be. I'm not impressed with activists who want to refuse people the possibility of regaining one of the five senses merely so they can keep their numbers up. That impulse is no less tyrannical than that behind compelling surgery over the will of the parents.
To conclude: deafness is not so disabling as to require government intervention, and no disability "culture" has any say over the wishes of a mother and father to have their child be able to listen, speak, and enjoy music and theater. In all cases, let the parents decide, however they wish.
Can we all agree to that?
No comments:
Post a Comment