/ot/ - off-topic

I think this raises an interesting issue. Is a lack of a sense enough to call it "child abuse" to withold medical treatment?

It's the parent's culture, it's all they know, and many would argue that being deaf actually makes them superior in a way. It means they're distracted less and have a different way of seeing the world. They can and do add diversity and richness of human eperience to societies.

Cochlear implants and scanning babies for ear issues would rob societies of deaf individuals.

"Nine out of ten Deaf infants are born to hearing parents. Many of those parents choose cochlear implant surgery as soon as they are medically able because it helps their child with speech development.

But the Deaf culture believes mainstream hearing America puts too much emphasis on the spoken word. They maintain ASL is a complete language, even though they don’t produce words with their mouths and voices.

Some activists talk about audism – a superior attitude based on, or mannerisms associated with, an ability to hear – and oralism – advocacy or use of the oral method of teaching Deaf students to speak. Audism and oralism, activists maintain, degrade ASL and interferes with the Deaf person’s ability to develop speech and listening skills.

“Deaf culture is important because it allows individuals to be who they are,” O’Banion explained, “and live in a way that is unique to them. There’s more to a person than whether or not they can hear, so don’t just focus on their ears.”"

It's child abuse

Ugh, this reminds me of some tumblr cunt who said telling people to not smoke or drink while pregnant is ableist, because why would you not want your child to be sickly? Not realizing that people would try to prevent, since it's avoidable and because it's fucking detrimental to their child's quality of life. I do not fucking understand what goes through the heads of people like this.

Maybe if they were talking aborting a child upon finding out that it would be autistic, since that's not necessary. It doesn't seem so unreasonable to do so for a frog baby, or a baby with no face, or a baby with an extreme developmental disorder that would probably need to wear a diaper for the rest of its life, because not everybody has access to the resources and funds to accomodate that.

>>82166
Wtf

From what I know, the deaf community can be very insular and seek separation with hearing people. The majority of deaf people, I assume, can lip read just fine so really the only people missing out would be non-signing hearing people trying to communicate with them. And the various sign language communities are fiercely adamant about the preservation, and even proliferation of X sign language. (These are attested in the field of linguistics to be actual languages on par with spoken varieties, btw). I suppose, the deaf community can be compared to Native American reservations (for example) and the degradation of indigenous languages in favor for English. Which is to say, the overbearing preference for oral/auditory communication that places stress on the deaf (actually some minor sign language communities feel pressure to learn ASL and not the native sign!) Deaf children then have to, along with regular schooling, learn how to hear and speak language, and depending on the severity of the condition this might be extremely difficult or put a huge financial strain on the family. Is it child abuse? It's hard to say, I think instinctively parents have a desire to have children like themselves (esp. if they're proud of xyz traits), or recall their own difficulties or something.

>>82193
It is technically a disability, but probably on the lowest end of disabled. Deaf people can walk and function perfectly fine, as opposed to those with wheelchairs or blind people, and they have their own languages (sign) with which to communicate.

>You wouldn't weed out those that are german, ginger or christian, so why do this to the deaf?
You can't change being born as German or ginger, but you can change being deaf, sometimes.
Being deaf is being invalid. It much easier to contribute to everything, when one is not disabled.
About christians, well, people do go judge too strict christians and other religions anyway, so that's uncomparable with being born as a German or redhead.

>>82168
how do they notice another car honking to them tho. Like the other driver can't know if they are deaf. Wouldn't that be dangerous?

>>82213
>Deaf people can walk and function perfectly fine,

See if they function fine when they get into an accident, gotta explain to the 911 where they are but can't speak and can't listen to instructions… or walking somewhere at night, gets jumped, can't do anything. Even if they can function fine it's only because other hearing people can pick up the slack.

>>82240
They can see better than non deaf people though, so they might see the robber coming. Their other senses are sharper to make up for hearing loss.

>>82224
Some deaf people would argue they're not disabled though. They would also argue that society would be all the poorer without their unique contributions, perspectives and ways of (literally) seeing the world. They are correct in that sense.

If you're black, you might want to have black kids to share your culture and identity with.It's the same with deaf people who might prefer to have deaf children.

Crippling children on purpose is disgusting and anyone defending this should be hanged