Employing genetic diagnosis to avoid having a baby with a disability is controversial enough. But a minority of deaf people would consider testing to ensure that they had a deaf child. Carina Dennis finds out why.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on SpringerLink
- Instant access to the full article PDF.
USD 39.95
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
Nance, W. E. & Kearsey, M. J. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 74, 1081–1087 (2004).
Taneya, P. R., Pandya, A., Foley, D. L., Nicely, L. V. & Arnos, K. S. Am. J. Med. Genet. 130A, 17–21 (2004).
Middleton, A., Hewison, J. & Mueller, R. F. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 63, 1175–1189 (1998).
Michie, S. & Marteau, T. M. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 65, 1204–1208 (1999).
Middleton, A., Hewison, J. & Mueller, R. J. Genet. Couns. 10, 121–131 (2001).
Wertz, D. C., Fletcher, J. C., Nippert, I., Wolff, G. & Ayme, S. Am. J. Bioeth. 2, W21 (2002).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Related links
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dennis, C. Deaf by design. Nature 431, 894–896 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1038/431894a
Published:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/431894a
This article is cited by
-
Untangling the Debate: The Ethics of Human Enhancement
NanoEthics (2008)
-
Deaf by Design: A Business Argument Against Engineering Disabled Offspring
Journal of Business Ethics (2007)
-
Analysing our qualms about “designing” future persons: Autonomy, freedom of choice, and interfering with nature
Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy (2007)
-
Access all areas
Nature (2005)
