Page 4 of 70 FirstFirst 123456789101112131454 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 700

Thread: Mutilation of daughter as disability treatment

  1. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by antiquity
    ITA.

    *runs out of thread*
    Heh. I was thinking about that other thread and wondered if anyone else was, too.

    C.

  2. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Tiger Racing
    Heh. I was thinking about that other thread and wondered if anyone else was, too.

    C.
    Me too.

    To add, although I probably shouldn't, I find it disturbing that the mutilation of disabled people is still being condoned in this day and age. I thought we left that behind in the 40's.

    Why not just remove her arms and legs while they're at it. That'll make her even easier to care for.

    And to state that this is all being done to make her as comfortable as possible is ridiculous. The last I checked, there's nothing physically comfortable about recovering from multiple non-medically necessary and invasive surgeries, nor is it risk free.

    Just my opinion btw. Nothing personal. Just hoping that we can respect one anothers opinions and avoid name calling and personal attacks.
    Last edited by antiquity; 01-11-2007 at 01:56 AM.

  3. #33
    The doctors themselves who wrote the journal article refer to the treatment of Ashley as a "study concept and design, where there is an "acquisition of
    data," and there will be "study supervision." This is not what you do with establish and approved procedures. This was experimental treatment being documented for further study. Ashley is a human research subject and as such is entitled to the protection and review of an IRB - Institutional Review Board under 45CFR 46 406.

  4. #34
    If her quality of life will be better for having this therapy I think her parents are right to do it.

    I don't condone butchery of the disabled. I also don't insist on the obligation to keep a troublesome body intact because it happens to be disabled. It strikes me as something that has to be decided on a case-by-case basis.

    She can't walk or run or turn over or sit up. Neither can some of us. She also can't talk or eat or think at a high level of function. That makes her different from us and I don't see why the same rules should apply.

    I don't know about the legalities. All I know is in my gut I feel that her only joy is the love and hugs of her family. If these things facilitate that joy, I'm in favor. If they limit her discomfort (which obviously at least a few doctors believe)-so much the better.

  5. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by betheny
    If her quality of life will be better for having this therapy I think her parents are right to do it.

    I don't condone butchery of the disabled. I also don't insist on the obligation to keep a troublesome body intact because it happens to be disabled. It strikes me as something that has to be decided on a case-by-case basis.

    She can't walk or run or turn over or sit up. Neither can some of us. She also can't talk or eat or think at a high level of function. That makes her different from us and I don't see why the same rules should apply.
    Does different mean less? That's the basis of ableism. Why should cripples have the same rights, protections and priviledges as AB's when they're different from us. We're all human beings, ones functional level has nothing to do with a persons right to not have to undergo invasive medical procedures for the sole purpose of making someone else's life more convenient.

    I don't know about the legalities. All I know is in my gut I feel that her only joy is the love and hugs of her family. If these things facilitate that joy, I'm in favor. If they limit her discomfort (which obviously at least a few doctors believe)-so much the better.
    The surgeries are pre-emptive. Her breast buds and uterus aren't causing her any discomfort at the moment and I don't see how the retention of those organs would or could interfere with the level or degree of love and hugs her family could give in the future.

  6. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    17,427
    Here it would not have been possible, none would have accepted things like this, it’s also laws against it plus no surgeon would have done something close to this. This shit is just way to low. And if those crappy parents can’t keep the kid without chopping parts of her, send her to me.

  7. #37
    I think what is being done to Ashley is abuse. I do not understand why it has been allowed to go forward when so much is unknown about what might happen as a result of what has been done. The doctors in their research article fully admit they do not know what the long term results will be.

    What happens when a female child's uterus is removed - does her body learn to compensate for its loss? The body learns to compensate for other losses.

    The hormone treatment she is on ordinarily is given to older girls to keep their heighth at an ordinary height. It has not ever been used to keep a child smaller than an ordinary height, nor used beginning at such a young age. What will the long term repercussions of this be?

    These hormones impact height, not weight. In the young women who have taken them, being overwieght has been of concern. Will she become a 200 pound dwarf adult? Will her lungs, heart, kidneys, and other organs stop growing or will they continue to grow and she will run out of room for her growing organs?

    I empathize with the parents situation. But the solution to what they are facing is nto to change Ashley, but it is to change the kind, quantity, and quality of services to Ashley's family. Yes, it is not easy to parent a child who is disabled, but that doesn't give us as parents permission to alter the child to meet our needs.

    Ashley's parents need support to help care for Ashley - Ashley as a child and as an adult and after they are longer here to care for her.

    That is what I think this comes down to - the greatest fear parents of children who will always be dependent upon them have is who will take care of my child when I cannot? What can I do to make my child be as easy as possible to get the best of care when I can no longer provide it?

    Its sort of like children and animals who need adoptive homes - when they are small and cute they get adopted - even those with disabilities/injuries - but the older they get the harder it is to find homes for them.

  8. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by antiquity
    Does different mean less?
    Not always, but sometimes, yes, it does. As a general concept. Of course, that isn't what Betheny was referring to and you know it.

    We're all human beings, ones functional level has nothing to do with a persons right to not have to undergo invasive medical procedures for the sole purpose of making someone else's life more convenient.
    Hey, I think we're all animals and no-one should be subjected to experimental surgery without their permission. That includes rats and apes.

    Why not just remove her arms and legs while they're at it. That'll make her even easier to care for.
    That's not as extreme a concept to bring up as it may first appear. I mean, she's not using her arms and legs anymore than she is using her uterus, so if removing one is OK, why not the other? My instinct tells me that her parents and doctors would not be so quick to condone that surgery though.

    Just hoping that we can respect one anothers opinions and avoid name calling and personal attacks.
    Hmph. Does that mean that screaming and cussing is out of the question too?

    C.

  9. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by betheny
    If her quality of life will be better for having this therapy I think her parents are right to do it.
    By therapy you mean invasive, elective surgery?



    C.

  10. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by Tiger Racing
    Not always, but sometimes, yes, it does. As a general concept. Of course, that isn't what Betheny was referring to and you know it.
    Oh really? Thanks for making me aware of that. I certainly wouldn't have sought clarification regarding her comment if I had advance knowledge of what she meant by it.


    That's not as extreme a concept to bring up as it may first appear. I mean, she's not using her arms and legs anymore than she is using her uterus, so if removing one is OK, why not the other? My instinct tells me that her parents and doctors would not be so quick to condone that surgery though.
    I would certainly hope not but it wouldn't suprise me if they did.


    Hmph. Does that mean that screaming and cussing is out of the question too?
    LOL.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-09-2007, 01:56 AM
  2. Wiped out by the wait
    By Max in forum Ability & Disability News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-01-2003, 10:39 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-20-2002, 12:27 PM
  4. Millions turn to disability benefits
    By antiquity in forum Health & Science News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-03-2002, 04:08 PM
  5. The language of clinical trials
    By antiquity in forum Cure
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-27-2001, 09:44 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •