Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Mar;23(1):3-15.
doi: 10.1007/s11019-019-09922-6.

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

Jacqueline Mae Wallis  1
Affiliations

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

Jacqueline Mae Wallis. Med Health Care Philos. 2020 Mar.

Abstract

As reproductive genetic technologies advance, families have more options to choose what sort of child they want to have. Using preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), for example, allows parents to evaluate several existing embryos before selecting which to implant via in vitro fertilization (IVF). One of the traits PGD can identify is genetic deafness, and hearing embryos are now preferentially selected around the globe using this method. Importantly, some Deaf families desire a deaf child, and PGD-IVF is also an option for them. Selection for genetic deafness, however, encounters widespread disapproval in the hearing community, including mainstream philosophy and bioethics. In this paper I apply Elizabeth Barnes' value-neutral model of disability as mere-difference to the case of selecting for deafness. I draw on evidence from Deaf Studies and Disability Studies to build an understanding of deafness, the Deaf community, and the circumstances relevant to reproductive choices that may obtain for some Deaf families. Selection for deafness, with deafness understood as mere-difference and valued for its cultural identity, need not necessitate impermissible moral harms. I thus advocate that it is sometimes morally permissible to select for deafness in one's child.

Keywords: Deaf; Deafness; Disability; Elizabeth Barnes; PGD; Value-neutral model.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Agar Nicholas. Liberal eugenics: In defence of human enhancement. Oxford: Blackwell; 2004.
    1. Albrecht Gary L, Devlieger Patrick J. The disability paradox: High quality of life against all odds. Social Science and Medicine. 1999;48(8):977–988. doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(98)00411-0. - DOI - PubMed
    1. American Society for Reproductive Medicine Ethics Committee Transferring embryos with genetic anomalies detected in preimplantation testing: an Ethics Committee Opinion. Fertility and Sterility. 2017;107(5):1130–1135. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.02.121. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Atkinson, Rebecca. 2008. Is deafness a disability? Ouch! It’s a disability thing. April 2. http://www.bbc.co.uk/ouch/features/is_deafness_a_disability.shtml. Accessed Jan 3 2019.
    1. Bagenstos Samuel R, Schlanger Margo. Hedonic damages, hedonic adaptation, and disability. Vanderbilt Law Review. 2007;60(3):745–797.