Is making a child hearing something that ought to happen, or something that the parents can ethically choose not to do? Should parents be forced to authorize the surgery? What the best analogy: Is being hearing-impaired like having a cleft palate? Like having a cosmetic birth defect? Like not being immunized? Like a boy not being circumcised? Use your ethical theories and your readings to give rich, thoughtful responses and challenge each other.
Cochlear implants will enable this child to possibly have more opportunities, and this is most likely what the parents are considering. Either decision would be the right decision. The parents are in charge of the child's welfare, and waiting until the child is old enough to decide might lead to an unsuccessful outcome. The friends of this couple should support the parents decision. The parents should be educated on all known possible outcomes with the surgery. The parents are thinking of what might be best for the child.
ReplyDeleteThe child has a birth defect, not unlike other birth defects. We would certainly want our child's cleft lip/palate repaired, or a huge hemangioma removed, as long as the welfare of the child is first and foremost.
I agree more opportunities is what the parents are thinking. Why not give the gift of heraing to the one they love the most.
DeleteThe longer the parents wait, the less effective the surgery may be. I agree that education is the key and they should do what they believe is best for their child.
DeleteI agree that we want whats best for the child!
DeleteI agree that if a child is born with some other type of defect or problem that could be fix most would not think twice about getting that fixed so why should this be any different. I think as a parent you should give a child the best possible chance at life.
DeleteCochlear implants I feel would have a positive effect on the child. The way I see it, way would a patent not want what is best for their child if this is a safe surgery and he is a good candidate for it why not it do. In doing this it would give the child the gift of hearing. I may self would want by child to be able to hear the sounds of the world around them. I don’t think people in today’s world think that the ones that can hear are better than those who are deaf. I see the no prejudices.
ReplyDeleteI agree that deafness does not carry the stigma it used to. As a child I was fascinated by deaf people , that I attempted to learn sign language. It is a beautiful form of communication.
DeleteI agree that the parents only want the best for their child, and more opportunities than they had for themselves. Parents make decisions for their children all the time that others may not agree with, but in the end the parents have to choose what they feel is best for the present and future.
DeleteEven though people who are deaf are able to adapt to it, I believe that deafness is a disability. I think cochlear implants for Gregory would be very beneficial. He will not gain "perfect" hearing from the implants and he will still need to learn to communicate by using sign language, but it will definitely lessen his disability. I think it would be a great opportunity for him to be able to hear, which seems to be the wishes of his parents as well.
ReplyDeleteI agree Sarah, because of the advancements of medical technology, it would be a great opportunity for Gregory. I think the Sean and Mary, being rational parents, want what is best for their child.
DeleteI think of the times so-called friends tried to tell me what was best for my children, or how I should do things and remember why I have few friends. Faith and family will always be there for strength and guidance.
DeleteA person with a hearing impairment within society is considered to be a disability. Unable to hear can limit Gregory in his future endevoures such as learning and communicating.Cochlear implants could provide Gregory with many opportunities that his parents were unable to have such as career choices in the future. I believe their decision should be based on the education provided by the doctor about the risks, possible complications and benefits, of the surgery. If the parents decide to listen to their friend and elect not to have the implants, I feel as his parents are enabling his disability and limiting his opportunities to succeed. If I was in this situation, I would base my decision on the theory of consequentialism: actions are permissible if the results maximizes the intrinsic good.
ReplyDeleteI agree that if they choose the implants it will provide him with opportunites he made not have had before. I think this is something that is exciting for the medical community. I have seen videos on you tube of watching children hearing for the first time and it is amazing.
DeleteIt sounds that Sean and Mary have adapted well to being deaf, but technology has come so far that cochlear implants are now available and could be a great advantage to Gregory. Being deaf is a disability and put limits on what people can do with their life. His parents need to listen to the medical professionals to see what is best for their son, not their friends. How wonderful this would be to see the expression on Gregory's face the first time he hears music or birds chirping!
ReplyDeleteI think had the technology been available to Mary and Sean , they too would have possibly opted to have cochlear implants as well. This is an advancement in healthcare that is exciting and makes a positive impact.
DeleteTaking advantage of advancements in healthcare can help set this child up for success in his future. Although, I believe a person that is deaf usually adapts very well, they have to work harder and have hurdles to overcome come that people able to hear does not.
DeleteIf the technology were available for them, Shawn and Mary would have gotten these implants too IF their parents did not let outsiders influence their decision. These parents want what is best for their child and others need to back off.
DeleteAs a parent I would want my child to have the possible advantages that being in a hearing world provide. I don't think Sean and Mary are turning their backs on the deaf community, they are simply trying to give their baby the best life possible. AS they communicate with ASL , so too would they teach him as well. This child could possibly grow up to help advocate for the deaf community as he would be a member of both the hearing and deaf communities . I DO NOT think deafness is disadvantageous , as many advancements have been made in the health and communication industries.
ReplyDeleteI agree that this will give him a great opportunity to bridge the gap between the hearing and the hearing impaired. He will obviously be able to communicate with ASL with his parents as well as others if his surgery is successful. I believe if it were there child, they would consider the same thing.
DeleteI agree that having this surgery he will still be able to connect with his parents and the ASL community and also be able to hear. I think this is an easy decision.
DeleteI agree that the surgery would be the best for this child and their finds should be more supportive.
DeleteI believe that being deaf is disadvantageous and a disability, but I do not agree that it is the hearing majority's prejudice. It is a disability that can be adjusted to and lived with, but there are still concerns for the deaf that make it a disability. The ability to hear sounds can protect us from harm, and alert us to certain things. I believe Gregory's parents are making the best decision for him and thinking of his future. Since they both are deaf, it would definitely not be a prejudice. They know the hardships and struggles they have faced growing up being deaf and I can't help but think they want a better chance for their son growing up than they had for themselves. Their friends who are criticizing perhaps are insecure about their impairment and are not thinking about the child's potential and future with the help of these implants. This will open many doors to his future without limitations if successful.
ReplyDeleteI don't think that being deaf is a disadvantage to all. I have a good friend that is hearing impaired and had cochlear implants years ago. Her implants were somewhat successful, she still requires the use of hearing aides but she has lived a wonderful life. She has 2 children and does well for herself and her family. She does not like for people to think of her as being disabled.
DeleteFor someone that is not hearing impaired it would be easy to say, I think that these parent should give their child the best possible chance at life and to do that he would need the cochlear implants. But whose to say that would be the best option for this child. His parents whom both are deaf have lived that life. They did not have the choice at their young age to get the possibility to hear. I feel they have done some research and thinking into this as they know that the best success rate is when it is done at a young age. I don't feel that they are not taking pride in their hearing impairment, I feel as if they can fix something or make it better for their child that is their right to do so. Their friends have the right to their beliefs but do not have the right to criticize these parents for wanting to treat something that their child has. In some ways being hearing impaired is like a cleft palate, there are things that can be done to fix the problem, but there are also differences. it is not necessary to have the implants done to be able to survive and live life. It would be a benefit to be able to hear. The need to have a cleft palate repaired may be so that a child can eat or breathe properly. To compare to being immunized again hearing is a benefit for life, immunization is to protect from communicable possibly life threatening illnesses, so I don't believe there is any comparison. I believe these parents need to do what they think is best for their child as long as they have been provided with all information necessary to make that choice.
ReplyDeleteI don't think the cochlear implant is comparable to the cleft palate either. Hearing is somewhat of a natural luxury whereas cleft palate creates physical complications that interfere with critical vital signs. The parents need not take into consideration what their friends are trying to influence on them. It is their child, their responsibility to make decisions that they believe are important for their family.
DeleteI do think that Sean and Mary should strongly consider having the young child have the cochlear surgery while at a young age since this is the best time to have it done for success rates. Having the ability to hear will help their child in many ways in life. I do not think that being deaf is disadvantageous, but I do think that being able to have a surgery to help your child hear will only help them in their future and possibly open up more opportunities for their child.
ReplyDeleteHaving the implants can only help him and give him more opportunities. Parents only want what's best for their child, in this case I believe they should consider the cochlear implants.
DeleteBeing deaf is a disability and it has its disadvantages. That's not saying a deaf person can't be successful or even more successful than a person that is not deaf, but they will have to overcome obstacles that one that can hear does not. I can't see any disadvantages for these parents to consider cochlear implants. As a parent they only want what's best for their child and give them every opportunity available. Since waiting many decrease the positive outcome I don't see any point in waiting until their son is older to let him make that decision.
ReplyDeleteI agree. I think if they feel obligated to do it for their child, then they should proceed while it has a higher success rate. It has to be the role of the parent to make important decisions for the child until the child is responsible enough to make their own informed decisions. It would be completely okay to proceed with the cochlear implant if they felt the future benefits where worth it.
DeleteMy husband and his sister suffer from hearing loss. Their parents always did what was necessary to make their hearing better. I believe the parents should do whatever they feel is right for their personal situation. I know there is a culture of people who are deaf, from which they have great support, however I don't think the decision to do the cochlear implant should be one based on prejudices or culture. It is not to say a successful cochlear implant is going to make the child's life great, but hearing is important in many different aspects of life. Improved hearing is important for safety, education, self-esteem, etc.
ReplyDeleteI agree Kelli. I think it would change tis young child's life in such positive ways that I don't understand how any parent could say no.
DeleteI do not think being deaf necessarily puts a person at a disadvantage. As a hearing individual, there are so many sounds that bring me joy and peace, but is only my self centeredness that allows me to assume those who cannot hear have any less joy and peace in their lives. In my opinion, being deaf only limits a person when they try to communicate with those of us who do not know "their' language. I think Sean and Mary McG. want the best for their child and they think giving him a chance to hear would be in his best interest. I think as a population, we do treat being deaf as a disability, I also think it should not be treated as such. Thank being said, I do think the cochlear implants would promote Gregory's long tern interest for the better. He would be at a distinct advantage having access to a deaf community and being able to hear. I would have to assume his parents would communicate using sign so as he would get and stay proficient. Much in the same way immigrants teach their children native and local language. I feel as though their friends should be a little more supportive and less judgmental, but, I think they think they are giving good advice.
ReplyDeleteIf the benefits outweigh the risk I believe the parents should have the Cochlear implants placed for this child. However, I am a firm believer in the fact that everybody has the right to do as they please. I think that if the family has all the information and education about the surgery and they understand how the child will deal with life in the future then they have the right to decline this operation. If it was my child, I would get the surgery for sure. I think their friends should be more supportive in their decision.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your friends comment Elizabeth, true friends would be objective and supportive, helping them make the right choice for their child.
DeleteI believe that Sean and Mary have a tough decision to make. They should not be forced to decide, but utilize all the information available to make a "Kantian, right thing for the right reason" decision. As a parent I think we all want to do what is best for our children. I would want my child to be able to hear the sirens on the ambulance, or a horn honking a warning, or even another child's laughter. If it was in my ability to be able to make my deaf child hear, I would make it happen. My decision would be rationally informed and not influenced by outside attempts at manipulations. I feel being deaf has advantages and disadvantages. With deafness our other senses become more acute, a talent that a person with hearing does not usually acquire. This would be considered a loss with the gift of hearing. That to has to be taken into consideration. As for analogies, hearing is one of our senses, it could be compared with blindness for this purposes. I don't think immunizations, circumcision, cleft pallet, or cosmetic birth defects are comparable.
ReplyDeleteI believe that if the child received the implants he would be presented with more opportunities in his life such as education and jobs. A child/adult not being able to hear labels them disabled within our society. I think their decision should be based on the Dr's discussion with them about risks and benefits. Im sure that the parents will want whatever will give him the best opportunities in life. Waiting until the child can decide on their own might cause more problems. I think the friends should just give an opionion and support whatever the parents want to do for their child.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the choice for a small child to have cochlear implants is the parent's choice. They are both aware of what it is like to grow up with this disability. I think if they are torn between the decision than they should allow the child to grow and once they able to give their personal opinion on what they then they can continue from their with their child's wishes.
ReplyDeleteI believe the parents should be the only persons to make the decision regarding the implants. They are responsible for the child's care and they also know what it is like to be deaf. I think where they lack information is from the perspective of what it is like to fully hear. As a medical professionals this needs to be somehow conveyed to them as what the child would be missing if the implants are not placed. After all of the information is gathered they should make a decision. Regarding the friends opinion, it could be heard by the parents but taken as just that, an opinion. In the end parents are responsible for making decisions. In 30 years the child is not going to come back the parents friends and blame them for not being able to hear.
ReplyDeleteIt is a central idea in America that your duty as a parent is to offer your children the best care. If the surgery is not done then this child may miss out in life things that hearing children can do. Hearing the cry of their own child for the first time, hearing a patient's heart beat, or the waves on a beach. It could also be argued that is would be dangerous for the child not to have surgery. The child could not hear an oncoming car, tornado sirens, or other dangers that we are protected from when using our hearing.The surgery may be unsuccessful and what was the loss? Then then the child is as she was before.
I do not believe that any of the above analogies are pertinent because they do not deal with the loss of a sense. Some are cosmetic or disfiguring in nature but the child still has all of its senses. To me a proper analogy would have to involve loss of sense of sight or sensation.
I believe that if the child has the opportunity to hear that he should have the chance. I believe that being deaf is disadvantageous. I don't think of it as a prejudice against those who aren't able to hear...but as something that may impede him in some areas of life. I believe that the parents should not be forced to go forward with the surgery but do so if they chose.
ReplyDelete