Some deaf people view their condition not as a disability, but rather as an underpinning

Some deaf people view their condition not as a disability, but rather as an underpinning of a rich culture that should be celebrated and preserved. A deaf couple with genetic conditions that mean that each of their children has a 1 in 4 likelihood of being deaf (and a 3 in 4 likelihood of being able to hear) wishes to have deaf children. They decide to use in vitro fertilization and pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). PGD allows to examine the genetic makeup of the very early embryo before it is implanted. The couple plans to have the embryos tested with regard to whether they will be deaf or not and discard embryos that would lead to hearing children, but implant those that will lead to deaf children. They approach a doctor to perform the PGD. What is the morally right thing for the doctor to do? (We are assuming for this exercise that there are no laws covering this situation and whatever the doctor does has no legal or career consequences for her. We also assume that the doctor is the only person that could do something in this situation, so no passing on of responsibility. Don’t discuss medical inventions that may allow to avoid the dilemma.)

Instruction:

Start with an introduction and then develop and defend arguments in support of your view, as well as arguments against your view. Make sure to show that the arguments in support are stronger than those against your view. Note objections for all arguments. End with a conclusion that summarizes the arguments and explains why the arguments for your view are stronger than the counterarguments.
Make it between 1750 and 2250 word, include references to support the arguments, submit as a Word document.

Here’s an example structure:

Introduction
the question that drives the paper (the topic)
the position that the paper will take on the question (the thesis)
how the paper will argue that position
clarifications and definitions of terms that may be misunderstood
Arguments and Counterarguments
the argument (only make valid arguments)
discussion of the premises (are they true or not? how sure are you about it?)
this will get repeated for all arguments and counterarguments you have
Conclusion
recap of the arguments
explaining why the arguments are stronger than the counterarguments

Comments from Customer

Discipline: Biomedical Ethics