Duchesneau And Candy Mccollough's Thoughts For Creating A Deaf Child

In this paper, I will be discussing Sharon Duchesneau and Candy McCollough’s thoughts on creating a deaf child. I will first explain Sharon and Candy’s argument for creating a deaf child. I will conclude by explaining and responding to a possible objection that could be made to their argument.
In an interview with the Washington Post, Sharon and Candy support their decision of using a deaf sperm donor to increase their chances of having a deaf child. Many have criticized this decision since the parents are intentionally trying to have a child with a disability. During the interview, the deaf couple express that deafness is only perceived as a disability because culture is based upon spoken language. They explain how American Sign Language

Therefore, Sharon and Candy argue that wanting a deaf child is no different than someone trying to conceive a black or female child. Black, female, and deaf children all face societal disadvantages. These same groups can also be deliberately or unintentionally discriminated against in terms of education, employment, and income. Despite these hardships, it is possible for black, female, and deaf children to succeed and thrive in life. With that said, Sharon and Candy believe that if it’s not wrong to create a black or female child, then creating a deaf child shouldn’t be either.

The deaf will never be fully remunerated for what society lacks to accommodate them. With that said, choosing deafness for a child ultimately restricts the decisions they can make later in life. For a hearing child, however, being immersed in both deaf and hearing culture growing up greatly expands opportunities for the child’s success later in life. (Levy) There is no need for Sharon and Candy to attempt to ensure that their children will be involved in deaf culture, as Levy puts it, “deaf parents do not need to choose to exclude their children from the hearing world in order to include them in theirs.” (Levy) Therefore, culture cannot be used as an argument for intentionally trying to have a deaf child, since a hearing child would be subject to the same lifestyle and culture of his or her deaf family