| Author |
Message |
Republican_Man
STV's Premier Conservative
Joined: 26 Mar 2004
Posts: 14823
Location: Classified
|
 Wed Jan 03, 2007 10:09 pm Parents Under Fire for Keeping Daughter a Child |
|
| Quote: | Parents Under Fire for Keeping Daughter a Child
Her name is Ashley X, and she is the little girl who will never grow up.
Until New Year�s Day, not even her first name was known. Ashley was a faceless case study, cited in a paper by two doctors at Seattle Children�s Hospital as they outlined a treatment so radical that it brought with it allegations of �eugenics�, of creating a 21st-century Frankenstein�s monster, of maiming a child for the sake of convenience.
The reason for the controversy is this: three years ago, when Ashley began to display early signs of puberty, her parents instructed doctors to remove her uterus, appendix and still-forming breasts, then treat her with high doses of oestrogen to stunt her growth.
In other words, Ashley was sterilized and frozen in time, for ever to remain a child. She was only 6-years-old.
Read more here. |
This is...shocking. I don't know quite how to take it.
-------signature-------
"Rights are only as good as the willingness of some to exercise responsibility for those rights- Fmr. Colorado Senate Pres. John Andrews
|
|
|
WeAz
Commodore
Joined: 03 Apr 2004
Posts: 1519
Location: Where you aren't
|
| Wed Jan 03, 2007 10:16 pm |
|
Thats just wierd...
|
|
|
TrekkieMage
Office Junkie
Joined: 17 Oct 2004
Posts: 5335
Location: Hiding
|
| Wed Jan 03, 2007 10:58 pm |
|
...
Isn't the point of parenting to help your child achieve adulthood with all the tools they need to succeed in life?
|
|
|
Hitchhiker
Rear Admiral
Joined: 11 Aug 2004
Posts: 3514
Location: Ontario, Canada
|
| Wed Jan 03, 2007 11:09 pm |
|
That article is so unbalanced--not in the viewpoint that it presents, but just in the way it was written. The article itself gives a much different overall impression than the first part quoted here, which doesn't even mention her condition. The situation is much more complex than just two parents deciding to "mutilate" their own child. Were they correct in doing so? I don't know. We can go ahead and debate that. However, I doubt they made this decision lightly, and I believe they feel this is the best way they can provide for their daughter.
|
|
|
jonathan95
Delta Prime
Joined: 29 Oct 2002
Posts: 1544
Location: UK Newcastle
|
| Thu Jan 04, 2007 1:40 pm |
|
I find the article on the BBC News web site a little more informitive over this than the article posted which I found was confusing and seemed very biesest in the way it was presented.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6229799.stm
as for this case this is a very strange one in deed I suppose most people who have no experiance with serverly disabled people dont understand is the hardship the parents/family go through raising these children.
In many ways I think what they have done is good for there child because it means that her parents can look after her a lot longer as well as manage her not to mention releaving a lot of fears that the parents have for when there daughter has to go into care from the parents getting just too old to look after her.
In other ways I think its a bit dramtic what they have done but in the end I think they made the right choice for there situation.
|
|
|
Arellia
The Quiet One
Joined: 23 Jan 2003
Posts: 4425
Location: Dallas, TX
|
| Thu Jan 04, 2007 2:57 pm |
|
Given the abilities this girl has...that she'll never really walk or talk... If I were optimistic that she could be treated in the next decade, I would be entirely against this procedure. Since there is currently no way to help her become a functioning individual, I think the measures these parents took were entirely rational and helpful. My initial reaction was that this was a sick way to keep their child young... But that doesn't seem to be at all the case.
|
|
|
WeAz
Commodore
Joined: 03 Apr 2004
Posts: 1519
Location: Where you aren't
|
| Thu Jan 04, 2007 6:48 pm |
|
From how the article is written, it just seems like the parents are loony.
|
|
|
webtaz99
Commodore
Joined: 13 Nov 2003
Posts: 1229
Location: The Other Side
|
| Fri Jan 05, 2007 8:52 am |
|
Welcome to media bias.
This is definitely odd.
Keeping her "stunted" for medical-care reasons seems extreme but understandable.
Removing her breasts - plain creepy.
-------signature-------
"History is made at night! Character is who you are in the dark." (Lord John Whorfin)
|
|
|
Leo Wyatt
Sweetest Angel
Joined: 25 Feb 2004
Posts: 19045
Location: Investigating A Crime Scene. What did Quark do this time?
|
| Fri Jan 05, 2007 10:13 am |
|
I couldn't mutalate my daughter in any situation , but that's just me.
Whatever the parents do it is on them.
WeAz wrote | Quote: | | From how the article is written, it just seems like the parents are loony. |
I couldn't agree more. To me they seem loony.
|
|
|
LightningBoy
Commodore
Joined: 09 Mar 2003
Posts: 1446
Location: Minnesota, U.S.A.
|
| Fri Jan 05, 2007 5:06 pm |
|
Mentally this child will never advance, why make it difficult and let her advance physically as well?
This is the most humane course of action for a person like this.
|
|
|
Birdy
Socialist
Joined: 20 Sep 2004
Posts: 13502
Location: Here.
|
| Sun Jan 07, 2007 8:13 am |
|
Wow. Unbelievable.
Granted, she'll never gets to be an adult, but to keep her like this? In a way I can understand that you want to prevent her from having children maybe, but won't you just face that problem when you get to it? My god. Horrible.
-------signature-------
Nosce te ipsum
|
|
|
madlilnerd
Duchess of Dancemat
Joined: 03 Aug 2004
Posts: 5885
Location: Slough, England
|
| Sun Jan 07, 2007 11:50 am |
|
I do understand, to some point the reasons for doing this.
| BBC website wrote: | | "Ashley has no need for her uterus since she will not be bearing children," they said, adding that the decision means she will not experience the menstrual cycle and the bleeding and discomfort commonly associated with it. |
By removing her uterus, they have to some extent removed a chunk of suffering from her life.
I kinda wonder what the girl would say if she could communicate though. I mean, she looks happy enough in the photograph, and I suppose with the mentality of a baby she'll always be happy, and maybe preventing her from growing up will keep her as happy as possible.
Does anyone know how many years she's estimated to live?
|
|
|
magenta
Commander
Joined: 24 May 2005
Posts: 404
Location: AUSTRALIA
|
| Sat Jan 13, 2007 6:35 am |
|
I think that giving her a hysterectomy was the right thing to do but all the other things were ubove and beyond what I consider 'human'.
|
|
|
|
Search
FAQ
Log in
