Do Fourteenth Amendment Considerations Outweigh a Potential State Interest in Mandating Cochlear Implantation for Deaf Children?
Denise G. Bender University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center Currently, the decision concerning pediatric cochlear implantation for children remains a personal choice for parents to make. Economic factors, educational outcomes, and societal attitudes concerning deafness could result in an increased governmental interest in this choice. This article examines case law related to the issue of parental autonomy to determine whether the state, acting in the role of parens patriae, could use economic and social reasons to mandate the provision of cochlear implants for all eligible children. The author uses previous cases as a framework to develop an opinion on whether a constitutional protection for parents may exist. Correspondence should be sent to Denise Bender, University of Oklahoma College of Allied Health, Program in Rehabilitation Sciences, 801 N.E. 13th St., Oklahoma City, OK 73104 (e-mail: denise-bender{at}ouhsc.edu’ + u + ‘@’ + d + ”//–>). Received May 7, 2003; revised August
Related Questions
- Do Fourteenth Amendment Considerations Outweigh a Potential State Interest in Mandating Cochlear Implantation for Deaf Children?
- What percentage of a general vote is required for the passage of a state constitutional amendment?
- Is there a critical period for cochlear implantation in congenitally deaf children?
