6 ms·

Consider this from the perspective of a deaf person. While it seems silly from the perspective of a hearing person, a lot of people in the deaf community are co

Consider this from the perspective of a deaf person. While it seems silly from the perspective of a hearing person, a lot of people in the deaf community are concerned that they are viewed as having a problem needing to be fixed, rather than competent, highly functioning people.

commandlinefan 5mo ago
Coming from somebody in the half-deaf community, please, medical science, find a cure for the problem that I have that needs to be fixed.
- akoboldfrying 5mo ago
  Thank you for saying this so energetically and straightforwardly. To the greatest extent possible, we should endeavour to call things what they are. At the risk of turning this positive thread negative, there exist deaf people who would deny their children the opportunity to hear, and very little makes me more furious than society's willingness to tolerate this form of child abuse.
estearum 5mo ago
Then they can just not get the treatment...?
- harimau777 5mo ago
  Part of the concern is that if a cure for deafness becomes standard, then resources for the deaf community (e.g. sign language interpreters) may no longer be available for people who either cannot or choose not to get the treatment. There's also an issue that, assuming they work similar in this regard to cochlear implants, the treatment has to be performed at a very young age before its possible for someone to consent or choose whether they want to be part of the deaf community.
  - estearum 5mo ago
    I understand these arguments but don't find either of them compelling whatsoever. Here's my test: If my child was deaf and asked me when they were old enough to know that I declined to have them treated based on these arguments, I cannot even imagine them being okay with that.
Auracle 5mo ago
I understand their perspective but it’s still silly. I’m a competent, highly functional person. I also have idiopathic hypersomnia and IBS-D. I’d love a fix for either; I want to live the best life possible. The whole deaf community opposition to treatment reads as just a defensive mechanism. Being deaf means that one of your limited amount of senses doesn’t work. By definition, they’re disabled. That’d be like people whole are really near or farsighted not using glasses because they’ve decided not being able to see is their culture or personality. It’s ridiculous, and that viewpoint should be more than ridiculed when deaf parents don’t pursue treatment for their children.
- marssaxman 5mo ago
  The difference between deafness and other disabilities is that deafness forces you to communicate differently. That communication difference creates a separate language community, which develops its own culture, just as every other language community does. When people belong to a certain culture, that belonging often forms a part of their sense of self. When it comes to children, then, the question is not just "do I want my child to hear better than I can", but also "do I want my child to speak the same language and belong to the same culture that I do" - something most parents want very much.
  - altruios 5mo ago
    > When it comes to children, then, the question is not just "do I want my child to hear better than I can", but also "do I want my child to speak the same language and belong to the same culture that I do" - something most parents want very much. That's simply: 'what is best for my child' vs 'what is best for my relationship with my child'. Only one of those actually has the best interests of the child at heart. Only one of those opinions is respectable. Growing up with the latter leads to resentment towards the parent generally.
    - lazyasciiart 5mo ago
      It’s like raising your kid in a remote cabin without access to services and schools.
neonstatic 5mo ago
What is particularly striking to me is bundling of two factors here: - Loss of hearing - Identity built around loss of hearing To me these two are distinct. I don't value people based on their disabilities or lack there of. So for me the ability to fix a body's physical deficiency is always a good thing. It makes life better for the person inside the body. These arguments, that I called stupid, conflate both points and assume that seeing lack/loss of hearing as an impediment automatically passes judgement on people who suffer from it. I'd also point out that creating an identity around a feature of one's body is a poor man's substitute for loving yourself. No wonder that people who do that get so defensive. Everything becomes a personal attack to them. While it's understandable, it doesn't make it any smarter, wiser, or functional.
- lazyasciiart 5mo ago
  The factor you are missing in the middle is “language and culture developed specifically around this loss of hearing”. The identity isn’t built around lack of hearing, it’s built around a society that will be literally destroyed if the specific feature that mandates membership is eradicated. As an analogy, how would you feel about a new mandate that all babies learn English as a first language?
  - bluGill 5mo ago
    I know several hearing people who are part of the deaf culture. They grew up with deaf parents or otherwise interact with that culture to join. I'm sure their kids will not be. Just like my grandpa was part of a German speaking culture that my dad never joined.
  - neonstatic 5mo ago
    > As an analogy, how would you feel about a new mandate that all babies learn English as a first language? I think it would be wonderful in its effects (I am not a native English speaker), but I don't like the "mandate" part. As for the other point you are making - the language and culture were developed to work around physical issue of not hearing. Those who have learned the language can continue to use it after regaining hearing. I don't see why those who can hear couldn't learn it if they wanted to (e.g. to communicate with someone who decides to not pursue treatment for whatever reason). I also don't see why preserving something, that solves a problem that now has a better solution, is so important.
squigz 5mo ago
I wonder what the actual prevalence of this sentiment among deaf people is. I would expect it to be exceedingly low. I'm not deaf, but I'm legally blind and autistic. Interestingly, I've never once heard of someone take this position with regards to visual impairment. Why is that seemingly so universally agreed upon to be a "real" disability, and things like autism and deafness aren't?

commandlinefan 5mo ago

Coming from somebody in the half-deaf community, please, medical science, find a cure for the problem that I have that needs to be fixed.

akoboldfrying 5mo ago
Thank you for saying this so energetically and straightforwardly. To the greatest extent possible, we should endeavour to call things what they are. At the risk of turning this positive thread negative, there exist deaf people who would deny their children the opportunity to hear, and very little makes me more furious than society's willingness to tolerate this form of child abuse.

estearum 5mo ago

Then they can just not get the treatment...?

harimau777 5mo ago
Part of the concern is that if a cure for deafness becomes standard, then resources for the deaf community (e.g. sign language interpreters) may no longer be available for people who either cannot or choose not to get the treatment. There's also an issue that, assuming they work similar in this regard to cochlear implants, the treatment has to be performed at a very young age before its possible for someone to consent or choose whether they want to be part of the deaf community.
- estearum 5mo ago
  I understand these arguments but don't find either of them compelling whatsoever. Here's my test: If my child was deaf and asked me when they were old enough to know that I declined to have them treated based on these arguments, I cannot even imagine them being okay with that.

Auracle 5mo ago

I understand their perspective but it’s still silly. I’m a competent, highly functional person. I also have idiopathic hypersomnia and IBS-D. I’d love a fix for either; I want to live the best life possible. The whole deaf community opposition to treatment reads as just a defensive mechanism. Being deaf means that one of your limited amount of senses doesn’t work. By definition, they’re disabled. That’d be like people whole are really near or farsighted not using glasses because they’ve decided not being able to see is their culture or personality. It’s ridiculous, and that viewpoint should be more than ridiculed when deaf parents don’t pursue treatment for their children.

marssaxman 5mo ago
The difference between deafness and other disabilities is that deafness forces you to communicate differently. That communication difference creates a separate language community, which develops its own culture, just as every other language community does. When people belong to a certain culture, that belonging often forms a part of their sense of self. When it comes to children, then, the question is not just "do I want my child to hear better than I can", but also "do I want my child to speak the same language and belong to the same culture that I do" - something most parents want very much.
- altruios 5mo ago
  > When it comes to children, then, the question is not just "do I want my child to hear better than I can", but also "do I want my child to speak the same language and belong to the same culture that I do" - something most parents want very much. That's simply: 'what is best for my child' vs 'what is best for my relationship with my child'. Only one of those actually has the best interests of the child at heart. Only one of those opinions is respectable. Growing up with the latter leads to resentment towards the parent generally.
  - lazyasciiart 5mo ago
    It’s like raising your kid in a remote cabin without access to services and schools.

neonstatic 5mo ago

What is particularly striking to me is bundling of two factors here: - Loss of hearing - Identity built around loss of hearing To me these two are distinct. I don't value people based on their disabilities or lack there of. So for me the ability to fix a body's physical deficiency is always a good thing. It makes life better for the person inside the body. These arguments, that I called stupid, conflate both points and assume that seeing lack/loss of hearing as an impediment automatically passes judgement on people who suffer from it. I'd also point out that creating an identity around a feature of one's body is a poor man's substitute for loving yourself. No wonder that people who do that get so defensive. Everything becomes a personal attack to them. While it's understandable, it doesn't make it any smarter, wiser, or functional.

lazyasciiart 5mo ago
The factor you are missing in the middle is “language and culture developed specifically around this loss of hearing”. The identity isn’t built around lack of hearing, it’s built around a society that will be literally destroyed if the specific feature that mandates membership is eradicated. As an analogy, how would you feel about a new mandate that all babies learn English as a first language?
- bluGill 5mo ago
  I know several hearing people who are part of the deaf culture. They grew up with deaf parents or otherwise interact with that culture to join. I'm sure their kids will not be. Just like my grandpa was part of a German speaking culture that my dad never joined.
- neonstatic 5mo ago
  > As an analogy, how would you feel about a new mandate that all babies learn English as a first language? I think it would be wonderful in its effects (I am not a native English speaker), but I don't like the "mandate" part. As for the other point you are making - the language and culture were developed to work around physical issue of not hearing. Those who have learned the language can continue to use it after regaining hearing. I don't see why those who can hear couldn't learn it if they wanted to (e.g. to communicate with someone who decides to not pursue treatment for whatever reason). I also don't see why preserving something, that solves a problem that now has a better solution, is so important.

squigz 5mo ago

I wonder what the actual prevalence of this sentiment among deaf people is. I would expect it to be exceedingly low. I'm not deaf, but I'm legally blind and autistic. Interestingly, I've never once heard of someone take this position with regards to visual impairment. Why is that seemingly so universally agreed upon to be a "real" disability, and things like autism and deafness aren't?