Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 22 (4):337-349 (2001)

In congenitally or prelingually deaf childrencochlear implantation is open to seriousethical challenge. The ethical dimension ofthis technology is closely related to both asocial standard of quality of life and to theuncertainty of the overall results of cochlearimplantation. Uncertainty with regards theacquisition of oral communicative skills.However, in the western world, available datasuggest that deafness is associated with thelowest educational level and the lowest familyincome. Notwithstanding the existence of aDeaf-World, deafness should be considered as ahandicap. Therefore, society should provide themeans for the fulfilment of a deaf child'sspecific needs.For the time being there is no definitiveanswer with regard the best way to rehabilitatea particular deaf child. Therefore,communitarian values may be acceptable. If thedeaf child parents' decide not to implant,their decision should be respected. Guardiansare entitled to determine which standard ofbest interest to use in a specificcircumstance. They are the proper judges ofwhat (re)habilitation process is best for theirdeaf child. However, most deaf children areborn to two hearing parents. Probably, theywill not be acculturated in the Deaf-World. Itfollows that cochlear implantation is awelcomed (re)habilitation technology.If auditory (re)habilitation will in the futureprovide the necessary communicative skills, inparticular oral language acquisition, customs,values and attitudes of the hearing worldshould be regarded as necessary to accomplish adeaf child's right to an open future. Ifcochlear implantation technology will provideall deaf children with the capacity to developacceptable oral communicative skills –whatever the hearing status of the family andthe cultural environment – then auditory(re)habilitation will be an ethical imperative.
Keywords cochlear implants  ethics  informed consent
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2004
DOI 10.1023/A:1011810303045
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 64,209
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

The time of one's life: views of aging and age group justice.Nancy S. Jecker - 2021 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 43 (1):1-14.
Implant Ethics.S. O. Hansson - 2005 - Journal of Medical Ethics 31 (9):519-525.
Choosing for the Child with Cochlear Implants: A Note of Precaution. [REVIEW]Patrick Kermit - 2010 - Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 13 (2):157-167.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
89 ( #122,398 of 2,455,349 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #449,153 of 2,455,349 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes