Literature DB >> 15467091

There is a difference between selecting a deaf embryo and deafening a hearing child.

M Häyry1.   

Abstract

If genetic diagnosis and preimplantation selection could be employed to produce deaf children, would it be acceptable for deaf parents to do so? Some say no, because there is no moral difference between selecting a deaf embryo and deafening a hearing child, and because it would be wrong to deafen infants. It is argued in this paper, however, that this view is untenable. There are differences between the two activities, and it is perfectly possible to condone genetic selection for deafness while condemning attempts to deafen infants at birth.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Analytical Approach; Genetics and Reproduction

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15467091      PMCID: PMC1733928          DOI: 10.1136/jme.2002.001891

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Ethics        ISSN: 0306-6800            Impact factor:   2.903


  9 in total

1.  Is there a coherent social conception of disability?

Authors:  J Harris
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 2.903

Review 2.  Genetic dilemmas and the child's right to an open future.

Authors:  D S Davis
Journal:  Hastings Cent Rep       Date:  1997 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.683

3.  Ethical issues in cochlear implant surgery: an exploration into disease, disability, and the best interests of the child.

Authors:  Harlan Lane; Michael Grodin
Journal:  Kennedy Inst Ethics J       Date:  1997-09

Review 4.  One principle and three fallacies of disability studies.

Authors:  J Harris
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 2.903

5.  The welfare of the child.

Authors:  J Harris
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2000

6.  Lesbian couple create a child who is deaf like them.

Authors:  M Spriggs
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 2.903

7.  Are attempts to have impaired children justifiable?

Authors:  K W Anstey
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 2.903

8.  Deafness, culture, and choice.

Authors:  N Levy
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 2.903

9.  Genetic technology: a threat to deafness.

Authors:  R Chadwick; M Levitt
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  1998
  9 in total
  2 in total

1.  Persons and their parts: new reproductive technologies and risks of commodification.

Authors:  Heather Widdows
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2009-01-09

2.  Is it ever morally permissible to select for deafness in one's child?

Authors:  Jacqueline Mae Wallis
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2020-03
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.