Maybe, but shouldn’t the cure be there for those that want it?
This gets into the weeds pretty fast. The problem is not necessarily the “cure” per se. It’s the subtext that anyone who doesn’t opt for it is being unreasonable. It’s the issues that arise when people stop spending money on ADA compliance when you could just take a pill for it. It’s the minority group becoming even more invisible as their numbers diminish. It’s the loss of cultural connections between family members.
This are problems that have to be dealt with, but I can’t see this problems are justification for denying “the cure” to those that want it.
And of course it’s treating a disability as if it were a disease.
How about we treat a disability as a disability instead of a person’s race, or religion?
That’s not going to fly with this group. Race, religion, sexual orientation, and disabilities are all in a bucket called “identities”. Yes, they’re different from each other, but the basic concept of curing an identity is problematic (and people seriously also try to cure sexual orientation like a disease, and disability advocates see that as a parallel). Curing a disease, no problem. Curing an identity, them’s fighting words.
I completely appreciate those who view their disabilities as identities. Much power to them.
But I’m not sure about the idea that every “problem” is an identity and thus shouldn’t be “cured.” Should people with poor vision not wear contacts (or glasses for that matter)? Should people with bad teeth not get braces?
How about this, what about transgendered people. One could argue their transgender is part of their identity. So should they be denied a sex change operation? You could argue such is a “cure”, just like allowing a deaf person to hear.
Transgender is an identity. Pressuring them to have a sex change, or shaming them into having a sex change, or withholding some other sort of accommodation just because they won’t have a sex change like a reasonable person, those would all be comparable to what we’re discussing. Someone choosing to have a sex change and then doing it? Not a problem.
Yet it seems to be a problem when it comes to the deaf person choosing to get the implants to be able to hear.
According to who?
Multiple people have posted on here that there are groups of deaf people that seem to have problem with it.
You posted the video, but who has a problem with this? I think this might be where we’re talking past each other to some degree. I’ve already said many deaf people do in fact choose cochlear implants, and that society as a whole is very supportive of this, even to the point of subtly pressuring them to make the very choice you’re saying they’re being denied.
I didn’t say they were being denied the choice, I am saying that it seems like there are some deaf groups that would deny them the choice. Multiple people on here have posted about such.
Regarding parents deciding things for their children. That happens all the time on many fronts. It’s the condition of being a minor, and has very little to do specifically with disability.
but how often does it happen that parents get the right to deny their kids the cure to something?