|
|
seiberwing (![[info]](http://www.journalfen.net/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} seiberwing) wrote in ![[info]](http://www.journalfen.net/img/community.gif){kind=small} otf_wank,@ 2007-01-05 00:11:00 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
This is one of the not-fun wanks.
I'm going to quote from Comcast's newspage to give a summary of what's going on here, in an attempt to stay impartial.
6 hours ago
CHICAGO - In a case fraught with ethical questions, the parents of a severely mentally and physically disabled child have stunted her growth to keep their little "pillow angel" a manageable and more portable size.
The bedridden 9-year-old girl had her uterus and breast tissue removed at a Seattle hospital and received large doses of hormones to halt her growth. She is now 4-foot-5; her parents say she would otherwise probably reach a normal 5-foot-6.
The case has captured attention nationwide and abroad via the Internet, with some decrying the parents' actions as perverse and akin to eugenics. Some ethicists question the parents' claim that the drastic treatment will benefit their daughter and allow them to continue caring for her at home.
University of Pennsylvania ethicist Art Caplan said the case is troubling and reflects "slippery slope" thinking among parents who believe "the way to deal with my kid with permanent behavioral problems is to put them into permanent childhood."
Right or wrong, the couple's decision highlights a dilemma thousands of parents face in struggling to care for severely disabled children as they grow up.
"This particular treatment, even if it's OK in this situation, and I think it probably is, is not a widespread solution and ignores the large social issues about caring for people with disabilities," Dr. Joel Frader, a medical ethicist at Chicago's Children's Memorial Hospital, said Thursday. "As a society, we do a pretty rotten job of helping caregivers provide what's necessary for these patients."
The case involves a girl identified only as Ashley on a blog her parents created after her doctors wrote about her treatment in October's Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine. The journal did not disclose the parents' names or where they live; the couple do not identify themselves on their blog, either.
Shortly after birth, Ashley had feeding problems and showed severe developmental delays. Her doctors diagnosed static encephalopathy, which means severe brain damage. They do not know what caused it.
Her condition has left her in an infant state, unable to sit up, roll over, hold a toy or walk or talk. Her parents say she will never get better. She is alert, startles easily, and smiles, but does not maintain eye contact, according to her parents, who call the brown-haired little girl their "pillow angel."
She goes to school for disabled children, but her parents care for her at home and say they have been unable to find suitable outside help.
An editorial in the medical journal called "the Ashley treatment" ill-advised and questioned whether it will even work. But her parents say it has succeeded so far.
She had surgery in July 2004 and recently completed the hormone treatment. She weighs about 65 pounds, and is about 13 inches shorter and 50 pounds lighter than she would be as an adult, according to her parents' blog.
"Ashley's smaller and lighter size makes it more possible to include her in the typical family life and activities that provide her with needed comfort, closeness, security and love: meal time, car trips, touch, snuggles, etc.," her parents wrote.
Also, Ashley's parents say keeping her small will reduce the risk of bedsores and other conditions that can afflict bedridden patients. In addition, they say preventing her from going through puberty means she won't experience the discomfort of periods or grow breasts that might develop breast cancer, which runs in the family.
Of course there's arguements from all sides.
Who exactly is this hurting? The parents have made a lot of good points. How on earth will Ashley cope with having the body of a grown woman, when her mind has been left far behind? Three months old is a mindset none of us can remember and therefore really understand.
As has been said earlier, what point is there of sitting in judgement of people who are living a life we've never tried? Maintaining the status quo with Ashley's physical state will surely help her.
----
For these parents to shamelessly mutilate their daughter in order to make her care less challenging is barbaric and shocking. In their utilitarian singlemindedness, they have stripped Ashley of her very human identity and rendered her a grisly, sad abomination. All responsible for allowing this ghastly act should be punished severely.
---
I�m with cannibalcritic on this one - such a severely brain-damaged girl should have been killed humanely as soon as the permanence of her condition was made clear. Surely what makes us human is our consciousness, that is, our self-awareness (beyond that of an animal-like ability to sense pain and bodily functions)? Denied this humanity, this poor girl is now, due to medical advances, having her humanity diminished still further. I understand the practical implications for this, but when a human being is so disabled as for it to be beneficial for them to remain undeveloped, to have their physical humanity denied them, in my opinion the kindest operation for him/her would be a euthanistic one.
If anyone finds a related incident, I'll stick it up here too.
I'm going to quote from Comcast's newspage to give a summary of what's going on here, in an attempt to stay impartial.
6 hours ago
CHICAGO - In a case fraught with ethical questions, the parents of a severely mentally and physically disabled child have stunted her growth to keep their little "pillow angel" a manageable and more portable size.
The bedridden 9-year-old girl had her uterus and breast tissue removed at a Seattle hospital and received large doses of hormones to halt her growth. She is now 4-foot-5; her parents say she would otherwise probably reach a normal 5-foot-6.
The case has captured attention nationwide and abroad via the Internet, with some decrying the parents' actions as perverse and akin to eugenics. Some ethicists question the parents' claim that the drastic treatment will benefit their daughter and allow them to continue caring for her at home.
University of Pennsylvania ethicist Art Caplan said the case is troubling and reflects "slippery slope" thinking among parents who believe "the way to deal with my kid with permanent behavioral problems is to put them into permanent childhood."
Right or wrong, the couple's decision highlights a dilemma thousands of parents face in struggling to care for severely disabled children as they grow up.
"This particular treatment, even if it's OK in this situation, and I think it probably is, is not a widespread solution and ignores the large social issues about caring for people with disabilities," Dr. Joel Frader, a medical ethicist at Chicago's Children's Memorial Hospital, said Thursday. "As a society, we do a pretty rotten job of helping caregivers provide what's necessary for these patients."
The case involves a girl identified only as Ashley on a blog her parents created after her doctors wrote about her treatment in October's Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine. The journal did not disclose the parents' names or where they live; the couple do not identify themselves on their blog, either.
Shortly after birth, Ashley had feeding problems and showed severe developmental delays. Her doctors diagnosed static encephalopathy, which means severe brain damage. They do not know what caused it.
Her condition has left her in an infant state, unable to sit up, roll over, hold a toy or walk or talk. Her parents say she will never get better. She is alert, startles easily, and smiles, but does not maintain eye contact, according to her parents, who call the brown-haired little girl their "pillow angel."
She goes to school for disabled children, but her parents care for her at home and say they have been unable to find suitable outside help.
An editorial in the medical journal called "the Ashley treatment" ill-advised and questioned whether it will even work. But her parents say it has succeeded so far.
She had surgery in July 2004 and recently completed the hormone treatment. She weighs about 65 pounds, and is about 13 inches shorter and 50 pounds lighter than she would be as an adult, according to her parents' blog.
"Ashley's smaller and lighter size makes it more possible to include her in the typical family life and activities that provide her with needed comfort, closeness, security and love: meal time, car trips, touch, snuggles, etc.," her parents wrote.
Also, Ashley's parents say keeping her small will reduce the risk of bedsores and other conditions that can afflict bedridden patients. In addition, they say preventing her from going through puberty means she won't experience the discomfort of periods or grow breasts that might develop breast cancer, which runs in the family.
Of course there's arguements from all sides.
Who exactly is this hurting? The parents have made a lot of good points. How on earth will Ashley cope with having the body of a grown woman, when her mind has been left far behind? Three months old is a mindset none of us can remember and therefore really understand.
As has been said earlier, what point is there of sitting in judgement of people who are living a life we've never tried? Maintaining the status quo with Ashley's physical state will surely help her.
----
For these parents to shamelessly mutilate their daughter in order to make her care less challenging is barbaric and shocking. In their utilitarian singlemindedness, they have stripped Ashley of her very human identity and rendered her a grisly, sad abomination. All responsible for allowing this ghastly act should be punished severely.
---
I�m with cannibalcritic on this one - such a severely brain-damaged girl should have been killed humanely as soon as the permanence of her condition was made clear. Surely what makes us human is our consciousness, that is, our self-awareness (beyond that of an animal-like ability to sense pain and bodily functions)? Denied this humanity, this poor girl is now, due to medical advances, having her humanity diminished still further. I understand the practical implications for this, but when a human being is so disabled as for it to be beneficial for them to remain undeveloped, to have their physical humanity denied them, in my opinion the kindest operation for him/her would be a euthanistic one.
If anyone finds a related incident, I'll stick it up here too.
