Do doctors think you're brain did enough development when you were an infant that it would handle visual info coming from your bad eye if your retina were replaced? I was under the impression that someone like you (who grew up without using the eye) might not be able to usefully interpret the signals from the eye if it were repaired.
There are limits to its adaptability, especially for processing-heavy tasks like vision for which the brain has specialized hardware. There is a world of difference between interpreting 144 electrodes to pick out just a couple of bits of information, and seeing.
In particular, if the brain were infinitely plastic then you could just wire the output from a HD video camera to some random spot on the brain and wait for the brain to figure it out.
I suffered from strabismus while an infant and got surgery at 5. For some unfortunate reasons, I did not get sufficient vision therapy and this turned into amblyopia (lazy eye).
20 years later, as an adult, I had weekly vision therapy for close to 1 year (once a week). All the other patients where kids less than 10 y/o. Although it is considered very hard (or impossible) to correct amblyopia in adults (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amblyopia#Treatments), my doctor was very open minded and we tried a lot of different exercises with more or less success.
I made some progress so the brain can learn some tricks. For example, I learned to switch my point of view from one eye to the other. I can also force my brain to see from both eyes at the same time though I then see double and the images are not aligned and the lazy eye's image is darker.
At the end, I stopped active therapy for two reasons. First, because I was scared that I would end up in a state where I would see double all the time and not be able to control it anymore. I know it is not very pragmatic but as talanvor said, I will not risk loosing my one good eye. Second, because it was becoming very expensive and the insurance was not ready to cover this kind of treatment for adults.
