Editing Models of deafness (section)

== Medical Model ==
{{See|Medical model of disability|Hearing loss}}
The medical model of deafness originates from medical, social welfare and majority cultural notions of the absence of the ability to hear as being an illness or a physical [[disability]]. It stems from a more comprehensive and far-reaching [[medical model of disability]].<ref name="Power_2005" /> Under the perspective that deafness is an impairment, the inability to hear interferes with a person's ability to respond to environmental cues, to communicate, and to enjoy aspects of mainstream culture such as music.<ref name="Jones_2002">{{cite journal|last=Jones|first=Megan | name-list-style = vanc |date= April 2002 |title=Deafness as Culture: A Psychosocial Perspective|journal=Disability Studies Quarterly|volume=22|issue=2|doi=10.18061/dsq.v22i2.344 |url=http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/344|doi-access=free}}</ref> People who experience hearing loss after acquiring a mastery of spoken language as well as those who are hard-of-hearing commonly identify with this model.

Within the medical model deafness is conceptualized from a "personal tragedy" stance, indicating that it should be avoided, eradicated, or normalized by all possible means.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Swain|first1=John|last2=French|first2=Sally | name-list-style = vanc |date=2000-06-01|title=Towards an Affirmation Model of Disability |journal=Disability & Society |volume=15 |issue=4 |pages=569–582 |doi= 10.1080/09687590050058189 |s2cid=144878150}}</ref> Often, the attitudes of professionals own assumptions of deafness as tragedy promote responses of loss; thus, hearing parents may experience diagnosis of their child's deafness as a tragedy with reactions of grief.<ref name=":0" />  Similarly, common reactions such as stress and anger are not necessarily understandable psychological responses to deafness, but may result from situations in which parents have not encountered in others an adequate response to their needs and questions.<ref name=":0" />

While medical ethics and law dictate that it is up to the patient (or the patient's legal representative) to decide the treatments he or she wishes, the press and professional literature are increasingly normalizing the discussion regarding using cochlear implants, oral education, and mainstream placement;<ref name="Power_2005" /> all being popular choices under the medical model of deafness.  The medical model suggests that, overall, the effects of deafness may be lessened through the use of technology such as hearing aids, cochlear implants, assistive listening devices, and lip reading.<ref name="Jones_2002" /> Similarly, doctors and scientists who engage in research are doing so simply because there is demand for information and for techniques which can restore hearing. The view that deafness is a "[[disability]]" also has economic consequences in political environments concerned with [[social welfare]]. It is the basis on which the governments in many developed countries provide financial support for the cost of [[cochlear implant]]s and other therapies.

Under the medical model of deafness, implicit questions may naturally arise, such as: "By what criteria and by whom is the impairment construed as an infirmity; how did the infirmity arise; what are the risks and benefits of the available treatment, if any; what can be done to minimize the disabling effects of the infirmity?"