… here’s a partial and unofficial transcript of the BBC interview with Tomato Lichy (left). The artist and designer is advocating for the right of deaf people to use reproductive technology to select for deaf children, which would be prohibited under the British government’s Human Fertilization and Embryology (HFE) bill, set to pass the House of Commons this spring. Reaction to the interview is here.

The interview by John Humphrys was first broadcast on the Today program on BBC Radio Four.

Humphrys: Do you not have an obligation to the child that may be born that that child should be able to hear if at all possible?

Lichy: If you see deafness as a disability, yes. But I don’t view deafness as a disability. I feel very positive about the language, about the culture and about the history of deaf people, and I’m very involved in the deaf community

And also, we already have a deaf child. If we say to her in the future we had a deaf embryo but the government told us we couldn’t have that one, how would she feel about it as a deaf person herself if the government had forced us to do that?

Humphreys: You may feel very positive about your deafness, and you are absolutely of course entitled to feel that, but surely you’re not entitled to make that decision on behalf of an unborn child?

Lichy: I’m nor religious myself, but people say to me: God created me as a deaf person, why would you oppose God? These children are created, these embryos are created, they should have equal chances in life. I mean really for me the core issue is that the government is saying that deaf people are not equal to hearing people.

Despite the fact that over time we’ve had more and more rights for disabled people, now they’re seeking to establish a legal principal that deaf people are inferior to hearing people. And there may be more laws once this gap opens. I think we have to stop that principle being established that deaf people are inferior to hearing people.

Humphreys: I don’t think that anyone would say, no sensible person would say, that deaf people are inferior to hearing people. But the fact is that they have a disability, a pretty serious disability. They cannot hear. Surely you have no right to impose, effectively impose that on another child. The child doesn’t belong to you. The child is a person on its own right.

Lichy: You say it is a serious disability. I disagree with that. We have an interpreter here for you to understand me. If I go to a deaf club, or a deaf academic conference with thousands of deaf people, you would be lost. You would be the one with the disability because you can’t use sign language.

Humphreys: Isn’t that a slightly perverse point? I after all don’t need someone to sign for me. I can hear the music of Beethoven or listen to a play by Shakespeare or pop music or whatever it happens to be. You can’t. So therefore you have a disability. Surely that’s simply a fact.

Lichy: Well I feel sorry for you because you haven’t acquired sign language, you can’t appreciate deaf plays, you can’t appreciate deaf poetry, you can’t appreciate the joy of being part of the deaf community, the jokes that go on. I feel sorry for you.

Humphreys: But I could learn sign language if I set myself to it, at least I assume I could. You can’t learn to hear.

Lichy: Yes, but now it’s recognized that deaf people do have a culture, a community of their own ….

… We’re talking about different perspectives about what disability means. I don’t see myself as disabled.

You’re not deaf, but you’re labeling me as disabled. I could say, “Oh well, black people are disabled. Deaf people have to struggle to achieve equal rights. Gay people could be regarded as being disabled. Let’s put them into hospitals and make sure they’re cured, make sure they’re not born.” That’s not the case. We do accept that black people and gay people are equal. Why can’t you do the same with deaf people?

Humphreys: But we do. I accept entirely that you are equal to me. But I would not presume, and many people I think listening to this program would not presume to make a decision on behalf of somebody else. That’s the crucial aspect here, isn’t it? On behalf of somebody else, an unborn child, that they should have what I said was a disability, and I repeat that.

Lichy: But that seems to be somewhat contradictory. Because you say that deaf people are equal but you say well it’s better not to be born deaf. That seems a contradictory statement. Really it’s up to us as deaf people to decide whether we are disabled or not.

Humphreys: Yes it’s up to you to decide whether you are disabled or not. It is not up to you to decide whether a child should be born disabled or not. That’s really my point.

Lichy: But it’s not just me. It’s the British Deaf Association, it’s the World Federation of the Deaf. Organizations led by deaf people. We all agree that deafness is not a disability.

Humphreys: Mr. Lichy, many thanks.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, March 11th, 2008 at 7:50 am and is filed under NOT2BEMISSED, assisted reproduction, civil rights, deaf/hard of hearing, disabilities, discrimination, human rights, international, law, public attitudes, public policy, quality of life, stereotypes, stigma. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.  Email This Post