Peer-reviewed article
Ethics for the Pediatrician: The Evolving Ethics of Cochlear Implants in Children
The story of the ethical controversy over cochlear implants is unique in some ways and paradigmatic in others. It is unique in the ways that it was shaped by the history of deafness, and of cultural responses to deafness, in the United…
The story of the ethical controversy over cochlear implants is unique in some ways and paradigmatic in others. It is unique in the ways that it was shaped by the history of deafness, and of cultural responses to deafness, in the United States. The story is paradigmatic in two ways. First, cochlear implantation was an innovative therapy that was introduced into practice without adequate study. Promising early trials led to FDA approval, although long-term outcome data from rigorous studies were lacking. In this respect, the story of cochlear implants is similar to the history of other innovations that were introduced without rigorous evaluation, innovations such as supplemental oxygen, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, or corticosteroids for bronchopulmonary dysplasia. Cochlear implants also are paradigmatic of a particular type of ethical dilemma in which advocacy groups claim to know better what is best for children than do the children's parents or doctors. This controversy happened during the Baby Doe debate in the 1980s, when advocacy groups claimed that doctors and parents were conspiring to discriminate against children with disabilities. Ultimately, the US Supreme Court invalidated that interpretation of disability rights. Instead, parents and doctors working together are given discretion to make decisions about what is best for children. With regard to cochlear implants for children, the NAD realizes that they are walking a fine line. As one NAD spokesperson said, "We don't say that hearing parents aren't qualified to make decisions about their deaf children. We say that they need to have contact with deaf people if they're going to make educated decisions". The same could be said for pediatricians. There are 4,000 to 8,000 infants born each year in the United States with severe hearing impairment. Their parents will have to make decisions about what is best. Pediatricians need to understand the options and be prepared to help parents sort through the complex data and multiple options in order to arrive at the decision that is best for themselves and their child. Understanding the ethical controversy over cochlear implants will help.
Related writing.
Why the Dutch Keep Pediatric Euthanasia Illegal
Pediatric euthanasia in The Netherlands has a unique legal status - it is illegal, openly practiced, and well-regulated. The most surprising part isn't the law that enabled this — it's what happened after.
Associations of Physician Perspectives, Personal Choices, and Counseling for Severe Congenital Heart Defects
OBJECTIVE: To assess whether physicians' perspectives of outcomes or personal choices are associated with prenatal counseling for termination of pregnancy (TOP) or perinatal hospice for severe congenital heart defects (CHDs). METHOD:…
Variation in the extent to which patient information leaflets describe potential benefits and harms of trial interventions: a commentary
Clinical trial participants must understand the possible risks and benefits of trial interventions before providing their informed consent to participate. The aim of this commentary is twofold: to summarize the discrepancies in the extent…
Pediatric Gender Medicine—Reply
Third, emerging evidence suggests that modulating glycosylation pathways could offer a novel therapeutic strategy for asthma management.Xie et al 5 proposed that targeting glycan recognition receptors, such as sialic acid-binding…
About the author
John D. Lantos is a pediatrician and bioethicist writing on AI in medicine, neonatal intensive care, and end-of-life decisions. His essays appear in JAMA, JAMA Pediatrics, the Hastings Center Report, the New England Journal of Medicine, and Aeon. Read more about John.