Results 1 to 33 of 33

Thread: Fertility and embryo bill

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Birmingham, UK
    Posts
    300

    Default Fertility and embryo bill

    What do other people think of this bill. I only found out about it a few days ago on a USA message board for deaf people. The deaf are upset as part of the bill is preventing genetically deaf people from producing babies. There is all this talk about 'leading in research' and about human/animal hybrids that I find alarming too. So please read it and see what you think. Please note that the first quote is government bases so you will have to read between the lines.

    Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill published


    Health Minister Dawn Primarolo today published the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill to reform the regulation of human embryology and ensure that Britain remains a world leader in medical research. The Bill will not however alter the model of regulation or the basic foundations of the existing law.

    The Bill updates current regulation of assisted reproduction and embryo research in the light of developments in technology and society's attitudes. It will ensure regulation is fit for purpose, and help maintain the UK's position as a world leader in reproductive technologies and research.

    The main elements of the Bill are:
    * ensuring that the creation and use of all human embryos outside the body - whatever the process used in their creation - are subject to regulation;
    * a ban on selecting the sex of offspring for non-medical reasons;
    * retention of a duty to take account of "the welfare of the child" when providing fertility treatment, but removal of the reference to "the need for a father";
    * provisions to recognise same-sex couples as legal parents of children conceived through the use of donated sperm, eggs or embryos;
    * altering restrictions on the use of HFEA-collected data to make it easier to do follow-up research;
    * provisions increasing the scope of legitimate embryo research activities, including regulation of "inter-species embryos" (embryos combining human and animal genetic material).
    Parliament: Deaf Embryo selection to be made illegal
    The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill is currently passing through parliament, and currently in its second reading in the House of Lords. A bill is proposed law that passes through parliament, to be debated (and amended) before it becomes law. i.e. an Act of Parliament.
    Clause 14
    This week debate touched on Clause 14 which states:
    (9) Persons or embryos that are known to have a gene, chromosome or mitochondrion abnormality involving a significant risk that a person with the abnormality will have or develop—

    (a) a serious physical or mental disability,
    (b) a serious illness, or
    (c) any other serious medical condition,

    must not be preferred to those that are not known to have such an abnormality.
    That means you aren't allowed to select a deaf embryo, and this has been confirmed as parliament's intention through the passage of this Bill (and could be used for statutory interpretation later).
    House of Lords debate
    Baroness Deech (Crossbench)
    In the scientific field, the Bill confirms the wider use of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis. That is good. I hope that your Lordships will be pleased that the deliberate choice of an embryo that is, for example, likely to be deaf will be prevented by Clause 14.
    This prevents selection of an embryo if it is known to be born deaf. It does not prohibit selection on the basis that a child will be born hearing, and prefers it. Since genetic testing will be common place in the UK in future, you are hardly going to be able to leave things to nature and 'wait and see', if a child is born deaf or hearing.
    Huge Implications on deaf fertilisation
    This could have huge implications for families where there is a genetic trait of deafness. Say e.g. you have a deaf gene in your family, and for whatever reason needed assisted fertilisation in order to get pregnant. If the embryos developed were known be deaf, a female would not be allowed to be made pregnant by a deaf embryo, and a hearing embryo must always be picked. This could also mean that deaf people are prohibited from partaking in assistance with fertilisation (donation of eggs, sperm). Do you agree with this?
    Parallels of past historical oppression
    To me this starts to enter eugenics and what Alexander Graham Bell was advocating. A lesser form of sterlisation of deaf people, what was practiced in Nazi Germany, to prevent deaf pro-creation.
    Who is objecting to this, or speaking on our behalf?
    What the hell is anyone doing about this proposed legislation? If it is ignored, by summer 2008 this will on the statute books and will be law. Who exactly is protecting deaf interest here, and statements by politicians that we are not equal? All those deaf organisations who make millions "on behalf of us" are doing what exactly? Sound asleep in a coma? Too hearing controlled or damn scared to say anything, through fear of upsetting their funders, and other chartiable philanthropists? Deaf voice and protection of interests is where exactly?

  2. #2

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    ugh. That's some ugly stuff.
    context is everything

  3. #3
    Va'amish Heartsease's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Delete
    Posts
    177

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    Some deaf people were deliberately creating deaf offspring were they not? It's surely not wrong for anyone to have children who happen to be deaf but I don't think selecting the 'deaf gene(s)' on purpose is ethical.

    I read the quotes above as saying that a deaf person (or anyone else for that matter) will not be able to deliberately produce a deaf child. I like thinking that children, deaf or otherwise, are beautiful and perfect as they are...but I would surely be upset if I found out my parents had deliberately selected how I would turn out. While I sympathize I cannot see that this bill has it all wrong (just from the snippet I read above)....I think it comes down to the fact that some deaf people are very happy and unaffected by their 'difference' but that does not mean that all children born deaf would thank their parents for actually opting to deprive them of the option of living in a hearing world. If a deaf couple receiving fertility treatment DELIBERATELY create a deaf child (where they actually select the deaf gene embryo over a hearing embryo)....well....surely THAT action smacks of eugenics as much as the other?

    To avoid 'oppression' of any trait (inc. gender, hair colour etc.) the first viable embryo could be selected and people receiving fertility treatment can get what other parents get....a surprise. Otherwise all fertility treatment starts to seem like eugenics. If, during a period of fertility treatment ALL embryos carried the deaf gene then the first viable embryo could still be selected. What do you think?
    "You can discover more about a person in one hour of play than in a year of conversation" ~ Plato

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Birmingham, UK
    Posts
    300

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    Quote Heartsease View Post
    Some deaf people were deliberately creating deaf offspring were they not? It's surely not wrong for anyone to have children who happen to be deaf but I don't think selecting the 'deaf gene(s)' on purpose is ethical.

    What do you think?
    There was a deaf lesbian couple who was asking for a sperm doner who was also deaf which would increase the chance of the baby being born deaf. There was a big musical about this. But people are murdering unborn babies all the time just so they could have a 'normal' baby. At least they didn't try to kill an unborn child because it wasn't deaf. I don't see why people got so upset about the case.

    Anyway this isn't the worse part of the bill. The worst is that they plan to create Animal-human hybrids and experiment on them. Surely no vegan can aprove of that!

  5. #5

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    I've got problems with the whole bill.

    I'm not a fan of fertility treatments or in vitero birth clinics in the first place. If someone can't have children biologically, it seems like adoption should be the 1st option, instead of the last.

    Regardless, if someone was to do invitro fertilization, choosing a fetus that could hear over one that couldn't seems really problematic... just as choosing a fetus that was deaf over one that wasn't seems problematic.

    In the end, the people that should choose are the parent-to-be with the advice and help of a healthcare professional, not the government.

    I can see how parents really involved in a thriving deaf culture would want their children to be full participants in their world, just as some parents would want to adopt children of them same race or children with similar abilities, while some parents would want to adopt children outside of their race and with different abilities.

    I think that a bill preventing the creation of deaf embryos is quite problematic (just as a bill doing the opposite would also be problematic).
    context is everything

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,344

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    whether choosing to be pro- or anti- deaf, this is wrong. People should stop trying to play 'god' - whatever one's definition of 'god' might be. Eugenics is wrong in every way.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    211

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    I'm not sure I understood what the actual intentions of the bill are... before I read people's comments I took it to mean that in the case of an embryo being impanted, a deaf couple might have to have someone else's embryo above their own genetic offspring? But if it means it's their own 'offspring' why on earth would anyone deliberately want a child to be deaf?

    As for human/animal hybrids, oh no, oh no, no no no

  8. #8
    flying plum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    690

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    heartsease - I read that in exactly the same way as you; it is to stop people picking particular traits, not preventing the birth of deaf babies full stop.

    I understand the concept of a deaf community, but a) deliberately picking a deaf baby is 'playing God', which is what this Bill is trying to stop (somewhat ironically, but they're trying to make the whole process as 'natural' as possible) and b) i'm not deaf, so i suppose this is a wild assumption, but accepting your deafness just because that was the way you were born would be one thing, but trying to come to terms with the fact that you've been deliberately made that way would, i think, be quite another....

    amanda

  9. #9
    baffled harpy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    6,655

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    It might be better to pick the embryos at random as that would be closer to natural conception. However I'm not sure the legislation prevents that - I think it just says that ones with an "abnormality" must not be preferred? So in other words you shouldn't deliberately choose one that would develop into a deaf person but you're not obliged to choose one that would NOT be deaf.

    I think the question may be academic at present, because as far as I know you couldn't reliably identify whether an embryo would develop into a deaf or a hearing person?

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Birmingham, UK
    Posts
    300

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    But you are alowed to select a 'normal' embryo so why shouldn't you be alowed to select a 'deaf' embryo.

    The way I see it meaning is that if a genetically deaf couple want a baby then they would be forced to carry an embryo that didn't belong to them wheras a 'normal' person whouldn't have that problem which makes things really unequal.

    I also find it upsetting that so many disabled babies are being aborted. The government want to pass laws to make it possible to abort the disabled at a later stage. This is very upsetting.

  11. #11
    flying plum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    690

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    dreama - i wasn't aware any genetic screening of embryos was allowed beyond certain degenerative diseases, such as hodgkinson's.

    with regards to being allowed to pick a 'normal' embryo, i know this is sensitive given that you are deaf yourself, but being deaf, or blind or anything else which causes you to stand out is surely hard enough for a child to learn to cope with, and at some point most people must feel some kind of bitterness at their lot - even if they go on to embrace it and see it not as a disability, but just a different life. imagine feeling that bitterness knowing you were deliberately made that way...it would be very damaging to a parent-child relationship, i can't help but feel, even if the parents themselves were deaf and had wanted a deaf child so as the whole family would be part of the same culture. although, on the other side of the coin, i suppose if a genetically deaf couple were to have children naturally, chances are their child would probably be deaf also? so i guess replicating that in the choice of embryo is not ethically unsound, otherwise one would be implying that deaf couples should not have children, which is, of course, ludicrous.

    amanda

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Birmingham, UK
    Posts
    300

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    Quote flying plum View Post
    dreama - i wasn't aware any genetic screening of embryos was allowed beyond certain degenerative diseases, such as hodgkinson's.
    I think this is about to change with this new bill. You are already allowed to murder your baby if it's disabled in any way, even with minor disabilities such as clift lip or down syndrome.

    I was born with thyroxine deficency. My Aunt Chantal also had this. She also had mental health problems and spent most of her adult live in and out of various mental hospitals. There is also mental health issues on both sides of my family particulary on my mum's. I have suffered from mental health problems too, which incidently I find a good deal worse then being deaf or blind.

    So do I hold my parents responsible for producing me with these faulty genes of mine?

    NO WAY! I'm only glad I wasn't selected out or murdered before I was even born because I enjoy life. It's a myth that disabled people spend their lives feeling bitter about their lot any more then normal people do. Of course I wasn't exactly thrilled when I started loosing my sight but I didn't bother with the 'why me' bit. I took it that this was some sort of punishment from god. (I no longer look upon god as an angry guy in the sky sort of thing it's just how I felt back then). However hard it was, going blind is no more traumatic then any other life catastrophy and a good deal less tramatic then some. Once you get used to it, there is no big deal at all.

    Disability isn't the only way of standing out. My brother also stood out as we are half french. My neice and nephew will stand out even more as they are one quarter english, one quarter french, half Japanese and living in Australia. So should all foreigners be subjected to these genetic rules so their children won't stand out?

  13. #13
    yum! angelamc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    los angeles
    Posts
    230

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    I do not like the looks of this bill.

  14. #14
    flying plum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    690

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    dreama - i've just re-read baroness deech's speech that you posted. although the legislation doesn't read, to me, this way, her interpretation of it very much seems to be that deaf children should not be born at all, and i agree that this is not a good road to go down.

    however, i'm just curious...do you think any genetic screening is wrong, full stop? for example, if we could screen for actual diseases, such as hodgkinsons? i understand that defining the line as to what we could screen for and what we couldn't would be hard, but as long as the line was carefully drawn, i don't think it would necessarily be a bad thing. but then, i am not, on the face of it, anti-abortion, and i get the impression you do not agree with such procedure, so i think we're going to have to part ways on this.

    amanda

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Birmingham, UK
    Posts
    300

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    Quote flying plum View Post
    do you think any genetic screening is wrong, full stop?
    It's not the screening itself that is bad. If they did it just so the parents could prepare themselves to take care of their disabled baby I would see nothing wrong with that.

    It's selective abortions that I'm really against. I'm against any sort of selective abortion wether it's on grounds of disability, race or gender, but your right I am very much against abortion anyway, just more strongly so when it's selective.

  16. #16
    Haniska's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    757

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...3194-2002Mar27

    Genetic screening performed before conception is way different than an abortion after the fact.
    I don't like that they did this. No matter what pretty name you call it a disability is a disability. Because the people I work for have a mental disability, they have certain traits that can make them appear child-like and young. Adorable, I love these traits about them; but if they could take something to become a "normal" person I would encourage them in an instant and do whatever I could to get it for them. It is not a gift to not be able to walk, to not be able to communicate in a way that everyone understands.
    I think people who refer to others as "Handi-capable" are ridiculous. Every day one of the woman I work for tells me that if she could get up and walk out of her wheelchair she would. She believes that he family doesn't invite her over because she is disabled and to some extent that is true.
    Another woman that I work for is constantly frustrated that she cannot always communicate what she is thinking. How could these two women, having these same experiences, want that for their child? Adopting a deaf child would be wonderful. They could give a child the support and confidence it needed, but to bring a new child into the world with every intention of making it disabled is terrible.
    it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble

  17. #17
    flying plum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    690

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    ^ that story is interesting. I can see how attractive it is to have your own community and want your child to be part of it. The only thing i would say is, that the 'hearing' community will never get better at the way in which it treats deaf people if they kind of 'hide away', as it seems in that story. i can understand that it is very difficult to socialise with the hearing, because we are not used to socialising with the deaf. I don't know...maybe the two just aren't compatible, as teh article suggests. I don't know a single deaf person in real life, and don't know any sign language...

    amanda

  18. #18
    Haniska's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    757

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    Sign language is a lot of fun. At least for me, I like things to make sense and every sign I have learned makes sense. Like, "banana" is peeling your finger, "boy" is indicating you have a cap on and "girl" is indicating you have a bonnet on. Its pretty neat.
    it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble

  19. #19

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Birmingham, UK
    Posts
    300

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    I read that article which I found interesting. Particularly these 2 quotes which I totally agree with.

    "But, you know, black people have harder lives. Why shouldn't parents be able to go ahead and pick a black donor if that's what they want? They should have that option. They can feel related to that culture, bonded with that culture."
    So sure, Jehanne's education may cost the public more. But deaf children, Sharon argues, make a society more diverse, and diversity makes a society more humane. Plenty of individuals and groups receive public support, and if you start saying which costs are legitimate and which aren't, well, they believe, it's a slippery slope.
    One thing that irritates me though is there is no mention of those 2 smart deaf woman using pen and paper or computers to communicate with the hearing world. I am deafblind myself. I feel I can communicate with anyone I want to providing they cooperate and use block capital letters, my communication card or deafblind manual. If they don't then they are obviously not worth bothering about anyway.

  20. #20

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Birmingham, UK
    Posts
    300

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    Quote Haniska View Post
    No matter what pretty name you call it a disability is a disability. Because the people I work for have a mental disability, they have certain traits that can make them appear child-like and young. Adorable, I love these traits about them; but if they could take something to become a "normal" person I would encourage them in an instant
    But why, some "normal" people are really miserable. I've also worked with people who had learning difficulties and knew some
    Kids with learning difficulties at school as I went to a special school and a play scheme during the summer where most of the kids had learning difficulties but we got on ok. I wasn't deafblind back then but I had a mild hearing loss and Asperger syndrome which is a sort of Autism but I wasn't severely affected with it. It affected me more as a child then it does now.


    It is not a gift to not be able to walk, to not be able to communicate in a way that everyone understands.
    I think people who refer to others as "Handi-capable" are ridiculous.
    But nobody can communicate in a way that EVERYONE understands. If that was the case everyone would speak the same language. I don't see anything rediculous about calling someone who is disabled "handicapable". In fact it's really good that they are being so possitive.

    Yes, I suppose their are whiners among the disabled but some "normal" people will whine and say how much they wish they had a better car, a better house, more money etc etc... If you look at what you haven't got you will always remain unhappy so I chose to focus exclusively on what I HAVE got. If someone told me I could see and hear again then I would tell them thanks but no thanks. I'm not interested.


    How could these two women, having these same experiences, want that for their child? Adopting a deaf child would be wonderful. They could give a child the support and confidence it needed, but to bring a new child into the world with every intention of making it disabled is terrible.
    But they won't have the same experiences. I believe one of the women were brought up on the oral only aproach which causes more communication difficulties then is truely neccessary. They are intelligent successful women who just so happen to be Deaf. Their children will probably have a better education than most hearing kids do. I see nothing wrong in what these women are doing. I see a lot more wrong in selective abortion where babies are intentionally murdered just because they are disabled.

  21. #21

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    I agree with dreama.
    context is everything

  22. #22

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Birmingham, UK
    Posts
    300

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    Thanks xrodolfox.

    I'm sorry if this is considered off topic but they are now closing down this really good deaf school. I thought I'd mention it here as it just shows how anti disabled this goverment is.

    'Cheap and nasty' Camden council to shut deaf school


    On Wednesday 21 November staff, parents and pupils will be marching to stop Camden council deciding to close Frank Barnes primary school for deaf children. Two weeks after prime minister Gordon Brown announced he would close 'bad' schools, Camden council could decide to close a good school with outstanding features.

    The school provides its entire curriculum to mainly, but not exclusively, profoundly deaf students in British Sign Language.

    The government's OFSTED inspectors said: "Frank Barnes is a good school. Pupils achieve well and learn to communicate very effectively through British Sign Language. The care, guidance and support offered to pupils are good, and some aspects are excellent."

    Liberal Democrat councillor John Bryant, executive member for Children's Services, said at a council meeting on 31 October, that any replacement to Frank Barnes would be 'equivalent or better' than Frank Barnes.

    This was when he was faced with Halloween night parent, pupil and staff protesters. But this 'treat' is now being replaced by a cruel 'trick' on London's deaf children.

    The council are reneging on their July decision to merge Frank Barnes and Blanche Neville schools. Now they want to close Frank Barnes and transfer its pupils to Blanche Neville school in Haringey, north London.

    They have not worked out how the Haringey school would provide the curriculum in British Sign Language as Frank Barnes has the expertise. The council have been told that some students could suffer lasting damage from this decision.

    The two main trade unions concerned, Camden NUT and Camden Unison fear specialist teaching and support staff who are fully trained in British Sign Language could face the sack if the councillors' transfer option goes through.

    Many parents fear increased isolation from school if these proposals go through. The move to a north London site from the current central London one would increase travelling times for many of the children at Frank Barnes, who come from all over London to attend this excellent provision for deaf children.
    Camden NUT and Camden Unison believe Camden council are putting their 'Better and Cheaper' cuts programme ahead of student learning. Transfer to Blanche Neville is cheapest. It would possibly save on the £1 million already allocated to rebuild Frank Barnes and would prevent them having to spend an estimated further £3.5 million on building a new school.

    # The demonstration starts at 5pm at the Crowndale Centre, Eversholt Street, NW1 (opposite Camden Palace) - nearest tube Mornington Crescent. We will march on the Town Hall for a lobby at 6pm.
    I've only just heard about it too on a USA message board for the Deaf.

  23. #23
    John's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    NJ USA
    Posts
    714

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    Quote Blue moon View Post
    But if it means it's their own 'offspring' why on earth would anyone deliberately want a child to be deaf?
    Some deaf parents refuse to let their deaf children receive operations that would cure their deafness, i.e., cochlear implants. It is more difficult for deaf parents to raise a hearing child and many deaf people do not consider deafness to be a "handicap" but rather they see themselves as a minority group with their own culture.

    What makes it a dilemma is that in in vitro fertilization several eggs are fertilized, so they usually pick the best one and throw the rest back into the freezer; probably to their eventual deaths. So hypothetically either a deaf embryo is killed for being deaf or a non-deaf embryo is killed for not being deaf.

    For some reason you don't hear too much from the anti-abortion fanatics about fertility clinics.

  24. #24

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    Quote dreama View Post
    I'm sorry if this is considered off topic but they are now closing down this really good deaf school. I thought I'd mention it here as it just shows how anti disabled this goverment is.
    Fyi:
    "They" are Camden Borough Council. They are a totally separate entity to the British government.
    ..but what would they do with all the cows?..

  25. #25

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Birmingham, UK
    Posts
    300

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    Quote John View Post
    Some deaf parents refuse to let their deaf children receive operations that would cure their deafness, i.e., cochlear implants.
    Coclear Implants do not cure deafness. It is a devise that some deaf adults may find useful and others do not. At it's best it enables a deaf person to function like a Hard of hearing person. They are NOT cured.

    I feel, as do many deaf people, that it is unethnical to force a child to have an implant. It has also revived the oral only aproach which prevents the deaf from learning British Sign Language which is something ALL deaf and hard of hearing should learn.

    Plus these Coclear Implants have been tested on animals. It wouldn't be so bad if they would stop now the implants have been developed but they are STILL testing on animals in order to brainwash parents into giving their babies implants due to tests done on animals that claim that implants work better if done before 2 years of age.

  26. #26

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    Again, I'm with Dreama.
    context is everything

  27. #27
    Haniska's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    757

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    Quote dreama View Post
    But nobody can communicate in a way that EVERYONE understands.
    I see a lot more wrong in selective abortion where babies are intentionally murdered just because they are disabled.
    Everyone is likely able to learn how to communicate in a way that the people who are consistently around them consistently understand. Everyone is generally able to consistently communicate with people who are not consistently around them. People with a speaking, hearing, or cognitive disability are not generally able to consistently communicate with people who are not consistently around them.
    I feel like you are taking my words as a personal attack on you. I'm not saying that you are not a whole person because you have a disability. Surely all people are people first. Most all people would want to have every advantage that anyone has. I'd hate to find out that my parents genetically engineered me to have mental illnesses to make them more like themselves, so that they could more easily understand me. That they gave me bad joints because they thought sedentary activities were preferable. Does that seem ridiculous? Is seems ridiculous to me that someone who prefer that their child is born deaf.

    On the last though, I still totally agree. It is worse that children are being killed just because they are different. I wouldn't give up my life for anything, but I would give up bad joints and mental illness. Maybe my struggle with the illness was a gift and maybe I have some different understandings and empathies because of it, but the illness itself is no gift. It is something that I chose to take medicines and to learn to adapt to overcome its control(at whatever level) on my life.

    Quote dreama View Post
    Yes, I suppose their are whiners among the disabled
    Are you saying that the people I work for are whiners? A whiner would lay in bed moaning about how they can't walk rather than getting out of bed and into their wheelchair.
    The lady who has difficulty with communication? How is frustration whining? She still goes out and tries every day. I know that it is hard to take when others don't understand you. She has her ups and downs like everyone else. Even though she gets no comfort by talking about her feelings she remains overall positive.
    it is wrong for a man to eat anything that causes someone else to stumble

  28. #28

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    I think that by hearing, you loose the ability to fully interact in Deaf Culture.

    In effect, the Coclear Implant could kill a wonderful culture, if it is done indiscriminantly. So could this Bill.

    I think that Deafness is different than other "disabilities". There is a special culture around Deafness, unlike around mental illnesses such as Depression. That is why Deafness is qualitatively different than other "illnesses"... and it might not even be an "illness" or "setback" in the same way.

    I think that to draw an analogy for the people you work with to Deaf Culture is just not workable. There is just no similarity other than the label of "disability", which by itself misses the reality of a vibrant real culture that operates outside of dominant realms.
    context is everything

  29. #29

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Birmingham, UK
    Posts
    300

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    Quote Haniska View Post
    Everyone is likely able to learn how to communicate in a way that the people who are consistently around them consistently understand.
    Not true. When my dad went to my brother's wedding in Japan (my sister in law is Japanese) He couldn't communicate with the people round him so had to rely on them knowing English.

    When I go into a supermarket I ask help with my shopping and the lady at the desk communicates on my communication card. Then someone will go round with me either using the card or block capital letters on my hand. There really isn't the communication problem that you seem to think there is.

    I'm sorry to hear about your own problems with Joint pain and depression. I've suffered from Depression. I can tell you that being depressed is a good deal worse then all my other various disablilities put together. So I'm glad I'm not always depressed.

    I don't know what the people you work with are like but I've also known people who use wheelchairs who NEVER say about wanting to get up and walk. Believe it or not some people get on with life.

    I think that Deafness is different than other "disabilities". There is a special culture around Deafness, unlike around mental illnesses such as Depression.
    I totally agree although I don't think there is anything wrong with being disabled. Blind and physically disabled people are sometimes more capable then the 'normal' people around them.

    I would have liked to have been part of the signing deaf culture but I was brought up using the oral only aproach which I think should be banned as it screws plenty of deaf people up. Fortunately I only had a mild hearing loss at first and my dad is a teacher so he was able to help with literacy which is a great help as a deafblind person so I'm lucky that way. Many deaf people who were victims of the oral only aproach have problems reading. It makes communication practically impossible if they later lose their sight.

  30. #30
    John's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    NJ USA
    Posts
    714

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    Quote dreama View Post
    Coclear Implants do not cure deafness.
    True. I realized after I entered the message that "cure" was the wrong word.

    Anyway, I'm just trying to summarize the debate; that there are deaf parents who do not want a hearing child.

  31. #31
    Karma Junkie vava's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Yorkshire, England, UK.
    Posts
    876

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    http://ukpress.google.com/article/AL...5ilpax5oiLsW2w

    Controversial new legislation allowing scientists to conduct experiments using hybrid human-animal embryos has been approved by the House of Commons despite a small rebellion by Labour backbenchers.
    even perfect isn't perfect - Rubyduby 4th July 08

  32. #32

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Birmingham, UK
    Posts
    300

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    That's really bad news that is! I hate this new bill it's evil!!!

  33. #33

    Default Re: Fertility and embryo bill

    Quote dreama View Post
    That's really bad news that is! I hate this new bill it's evil!!!
    Agreed.
    context is everything

Similar Threads

  1. Bill Clinton vegan?
    By andybuildz in forum VEGANISM - THE MAIN TOPICS
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: Feb 21st, 2011, 02:33 PM
  2. Maca Root and fertility
    By Mystic in forum VEGAN HEALTH
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: Dec 7th, 2009, 08:53 PM
  3. The mysteries of birth, pain, twins and fertility
    By Korn in forum Human evolution and environmental issues
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: Jul 21st, 2008, 06:17 PM
  4. Vegetarianism and Male Fertility in the Presence of Environmental Pollutants
    By Korn in forum Human evolution and environmental issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: May 31st, 2007, 09:18 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •