Throughout the film, several
arguments were displayed between the two families as well as among them. The
main topics of these arguments were deaf culture, childhood experiences, and
what’s best for their child to be successful in the future. In all of the
arguments, there are many valid points that one ponders not matter deaf or hearing.
All parents experience a time when they question whether what they are doing is
best for their child. Also, parents decide what culture and experiences they
are exposed to at a young age.
The most prominent argument
throughout the film is between Peter, his wife Nita, and Peter’s mother. Multiple
times their voices and body language raised as the conversations became more
intense. Peter’s mother argued with logos that Heather would have both worlds
with the cochlear implant and therefore have expanded opportunities in the
future with education and jobs. Heather’s parents argued with pathos that Heather
would lose all touch with deaf culture which is very important in them. Because
their family is also surrounded by deaf culture and Heather’s parents are deaf,
they want her to be like them-a deaf family.
The second argument that hit me
as important in their decision with Heather was directed towards her childhood
and how it would be affected. Heather’s parents were concerned about how she
would react with children her age after the implant if they decided to go
through with it. They even visited several schools and homes where children
with the implant were located. Peter and Nita wanted her to interact with both the
deaf and hearing and they didn’t think that was possible with the cochlear
implant. Peter’s mother assured them that she would be able to but their pathos
towards deaf discourse was too great.
Peter engaged in an intense argument
with his mom. His mom was very pro-cochlear and he was strongly against it. His
mother saw the struggles that her son went through and used past experiences to
take a stance on the family issue. She felt that the implant would give her
granddaughter a more normal life and would be able to get a better education
and communicate better as a whole. Peter argued that he turned out just fine
and is successful in his workplace while providing for his family. Both sides
of the argument are valid which makes for a heated debate and proves no answer is
necessarily wrong.
