Preventing the selection of “deaf embryos” under the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 : problematizing disability?

Section 14(4) of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 imposes – within the general licensing conditions listed in the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 – a prohibition to prevent the selection and implantation of embryos for the purpose of creating a child who will be born with a “serious disability.” This article offers a perspective that demonstrates the problematic nature of the consultation, review, and legislative reform process surrounding s 14(4). The term “serious disability” is not defined within the legislation, but we highlight the fact that s 14(4) was passed with the case of selecting deaf children in mind. We consider some of the literature on the topic of disability and deafness, which, we think, casts some doubt on the view that deafness is a “serious disability.” The main position we advance is that the lack of serious engagement with alternative viewpoints during the legislative process was unsatisfactory. We argue that the contested nature of deafness necessitates a more robust consultation process and a clearer explanation and defence of the normative position that underpins s 14(4).

Understanding theory of mind in children who are deaf

Research on theory of mind began in the context of determining whether chimpanzees are aware that individuals experience cognitive and emotional states. More recently, this research has involved various groups of children and various tasks, including the false belief task. Based almost exclusively on that paradigm, investigators have concluded that although ``normal'' hearing children develop theory of mind by age 5, children who are autistic or deaf do not do so until much later, perhaps not until their teenage years. The present study explored theory of mind by examining stories told by children who are deaf and hearing (age 9±15 years) for statements ascribing behaviour-relevant states of mind to themselves and others. Both groups produced such attributions, although there were reliable differences between them. Results are discussed in terms of the cognitive abilities assumed to underlie false belief and narrative paradigms and the implications of attributing theory of mind solely on the basis of performance on the false belief task.

Binang gurri: turning a deaf ear to indigenous hearing loss

Objective: This paper asks whether Indigenous health policies might be improved if governments listened to Indigenous voices, both Australian and those who drafted the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, 2007. Methods: A fundamental tenet of the Declaration, which Australia endorsed in 2009, is respect for Indigenous knowledge and voice. The author analyses legal, cultural and historical sources for evidence of this respect. The metaphorical and empirical framework of the analysis is the epidemic of otitis media among Indigenous children. Results: A survey of Indigenous advice about health clearly demonstrates that access to their land and respect for the diversity of Indigenous cultures should inform health policies. Despite, however, claiming to consult Indigenous peoples, policy-makers have not been listening. In many Indigenous languages not listening, or ‘bad ears’, has connotations of disrespect. Conclusions: By turning a deaf ear to Indigenous knowledge governments are undermining any respect Indigenous peoples may have for them and their policies. A new approach is needed. Implications: The Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples can provide federal, state and territory governments with benchmarks against which health policy can be developed and implemented. Authentic consultation could restore Indigenous confidence in government policies.