Summary Of Designer Disability By Julian Savulescu
Selecting for Deafness In the article Deaf Lesbians, “Designer Disability,” and the Future of Medicine, Julian Savulescu discusses the morality behind selecting offspring with a disability. With the advancement in genetic studies, the ability to test for genetic diseases is becoming more readily available to couples having children (Savulescu, p. 771). Also increasing is the ability for couples to purposely select to have a child with a disability, and this choice is sometimes referred to as the creation of a “designer baby,” (Ibid). In his article, Savulescu discusses deaf parents who intentionally choose to have a deaf child, and he argues that parents should be allowed to select for deaf children (Ibid). In this essay I will reconstruct
…show more content…
Many people see being deaf as a defining aspect of their lives, and one that allows them access to a specific cultural community (Savulescu, p. 771). Some also find that sign language is a sophisticated way to communicate (Ibid). Being a deaf child and having deaf parents may even allow a closer bond that is facilitated by the shared sense of culture and communication system, so it is possible that the quality of life of the child may actually be better if the child is …show more content…
I want to argue two aspects of premise one, the part that is about whether or not the child’s life is worth living, and the definition of harm. To recap, the premise claims that a deaf child in being chosen to exist is only harmed if his or her life is so bad it is not worth living, but this leads me to question who judges whether or not someone’s life is worth living. Although the choice may not be rational, some people, given the opportunity, may choose non-existence over non-hearing. People who live their lives based around hearing, like musicians, may rather not be alive than not be able to hear, but the decision belongs solely to the person who is living that life, and I argue that it is wrong to have the choice be made by someone other than the person experiencing it
Many people see being deaf as a defining aspect of their lives, and one that allows them access to a specific cultural community (Savulescu, p. 771). Some also find that sign language is a sophisticated way to communicate (Ibid). Being a deaf child and having deaf parents may even allow a closer bond that is facilitated by the shared sense of culture and communication system, so it is possible that the quality of life of the child may actually be better if the child is …show more content…
I want to argue two aspects of premise one, the part that is about whether or not the child’s life is worth living, and the definition of harm. To recap, the premise claims that a deaf child in being chosen to exist is only harmed if his or her life is so bad it is not worth living, but this leads me to question who judges whether or not someone’s life is worth living. Although the choice may not be rational, some people, given the opportunity, may choose non-existence over non-hearing. People who live their lives based around hearing, like musicians, may rather not be alive than not be able to hear, but the decision belongs solely to the person who is living that life, and I argue that it is wrong to have the choice be made by someone other than the person experiencing it