medical vs social: deaf

There are several important points to consider here that I think you are completely missing. 

1.) Most doctors and most parents are operating within a framework that already medicalizes and pathologizes biological, physical, and mental differences and deviations that do not need to be medicalized and pathologized. While any individual doctors and parents can be perfectly well-intentioned (and I will be quite generous in extending this benefit of the doubt to "most" doctors and parents, as, make no mistake, there ARE abusive parents and doctors), this does not mean that their decisions, ideas, and attitudes are free of social context. For example, a father who is a member of the Ku Klux Klan might not be physically or emotionally abusive to his children, and may in fact be otherwise a very good parent, but if he decides to indoctrinate his children in racist ideas, keep his children in segregated schools or homeschool groups, he most likely believes very strongly that this is in his child's best interests, but his decisions are most certainly informed by his racism. 

Likewise, parents choosing forced medical procedures for their children on the assumption that their quality of life will or must necessarily be better if their bodies or brains functioned in the same was as most people's may very well have the best of intentions and believe that they are doing what is best for their children, but it does not in any way detract from the fundamentally ableist and audist attitudes that are pervasive in U.S. society, which is the context in which these parents are making those decisions. 

2.) The presumption that to be hearing must automatically be better or worthwhile or valuable than to be deaf, hard of hearing, or otherwise "hearing impaired" (a phrase I've heard some people use), is one that is profoundly audist and ableist, because it completely ignores and denies the real, lived experiences of many thousands (millions?) of d/Deaf people around the world. The Deaf people that are in this thread, and those who have written very eloquently on these issues, would argue very much that their lives and experiences are valuable and worthwhile, and certainly not lesser or diminished by virtue of deafness. 

3.) If you were then to argue that those people are simply biased by personal experience, can you then argue that the "doctors and parents" who oppose Deaf rights, disability rights, etc. are not biased by personal experience? This goes to the question of sociological privilege. Those who are privileged by being hearing, temporarily able-bodied, and neurotypical are also privileged in that their opinions and experiences are not merely centered as normative, but presumed to be objective and detached from personal biases. Conversely, those who are marginalized, who are deaf and disabled, are presumed to be utterly subjective (and not even truly capable of holding a "rational" opinion or thought to begin with at worst) and always tied to personal biases that de-legitimize and invalidate those opinions and experiences.-Lydia