timesonline.co.uk— Seattle parents instructed doctors to remove their daughters uterus, appendix and still-forming breasts. This will stunt her growth making it easier to take care of her in the future.
Jan 4, 2007View in Crawl 4
long way away but @Bmcnallyits not about setting precedents, or thinking what might happen in the future scenarios. this case, as many other medical cases, should be looked at on a case to case objectivity.
I'm joining this discussion as the parent of a child in a very similar circumstance.The early puberty is brought on by the drugs used to keep your child alive.My daughter acquired a severe brain injury at age 7. Now at age 10 she is the same size as her mother creating major care problems. I understand why the decisions were made. These are CARE decisions her parents are making. The rapid growth and early onset of puberty have their own, often life threatening problems. This little girls parents are not facing decisions about whether or not to fuse her spine to prevent more injuries or cut her leg tendons. These are issues I face due to the very conditions these parents have manged to prevent. I'm not saying I would have made the same decisions. I really don't know I was not given that choice. But it is IMPOSSIBLE to judge what YOU would do until it really is YOUR child.
I hate to be a COMPLETELY INSENSITIVE assh**E (read: digg this down - and fast!) but....If this child needs that much work just euthanize her and get it over with already. I think it is fairly clear that this child will not have much of a life at all in a conventional sense regardless of how many surgeries and alterations you want to apply (being referred to as a "pillow angel" and all - I think we can thank that term for completely dissolving any shred of dignity that may be present in such a being). Time to call it quits, throw in the proverbial towel.Or I suppose you could just keep chopping her up and mod her into a small, easily managable pile of flesh with a pulse and see how that turns out - but hey, they did consult an ethics comittee after all - sooooo I guess that means this was a good idea?I think the parents would have been better off buying a dog, so they could check it out before bringing it home and make sure that it doesn't have any physical shortcomings that would require multiple serious surgeries to make it more acceptable and managable. Although - wait a minute - puppies are much more cute and enjoyable than grown dogs, perhaps I'm onto something here...** runs off to patent eternal puppy **
Ok...spelling and grammar errors aside...There are plenty of surgeries performed on children only days or hours old. Do they experience pain? Ummm, I'd guess 'yes'. In fact, how about circumcision? Many, many countries and cultures routinely (and have for years) subjected days old male infants to this procedure. For little reason other than religious/cultural status quo* And guess what guys? It's done without anesthetic. (Do I sense a collective gasp and wince from the males in the audience???) Now *that's* inflicting pain for no real reason. Medicine plays God every day. We 'save' lives that would exist for only brief seconds. The advances in medical treatment are what brought these parents to this terrible decison. A child this profoundly retarded would have had a drastically reduced life expectancy in the past. What would I do if I were faced with this dilemna? I don't know. And therefore I feel that I cannot pass judgement on these parents. And although I do not profess to be a Bible scholar, did not God himself say that only he has the right to judge others?Before any of you reply that recent findings suggest a decrease in heterosexual HIV transmission with circumcised males, I'm aware of that fact; but this isn't Africa and that is a new finding
Well, I do agree with you, and would personally have not kept a "human beeing" with such a disability.But this is a personal choice, and I accept the fact that religious people would not see euthanasy as an option for their own child. Hence the path they choosed.(And, btw, I think you are on something with the eternal puppy...)
lordskywalkerJan 4, 2007
Great. Now I'm not going to be able to sleep.
puma9thchildJan 4, 2007
long way away but @Bmcnallyits not about setting precedents, or thinking what might happen in the future scenarios. this case, as many other medical cases, should be looked at on a case to case objectivity.
beedutJan 4, 2007
I'm joining this discussion as the parent of a child in a very similar circumstance.The early puberty is brought on by the drugs used to keep your child alive.My daughter acquired a severe brain injury at age 7. Now at age 10 she is the same size as her mother creating major care problems. I understand why the decisions were made. These are CARE decisions her parents are making. The rapid growth and early onset of puberty have their own, often life threatening problems. This little girls parents are not facing decisions about whether or not to fuse her spine to prevent more injuries or cut her leg tendons. These are issues I face due to the very conditions these parents have manged to prevent. I'm not saying I would have made the same decisions. I really don't know I was not given that choice. But it is IMPOSSIBLE to judge what YOU would do until it really is YOUR child.
shrikerJan 5, 2007
Only in their mouths. *bricked*
ewc80Jan 5, 2007
You're right. That is a good point. I stand corrected.
zerompJan 5, 2007
I hate to be a COMPLETELY INSENSITIVE assh**E (read: digg this down - and fast!) but....If this child needs that much work just euthanize her and get it over with already. I think it is fairly clear that this child will not have much of a life at all in a conventional sense regardless of how many surgeries and alterations you want to apply (being referred to as a "pillow angel" and all - I think we can thank that term for completely dissolving any shred of dignity that may be present in such a being). Time to call it quits, throw in the proverbial towel.Or I suppose you could just keep chopping her up and mod her into a small, easily managable pile of flesh with a pulse and see how that turns out - but hey, they did consult an ethics comittee after all - sooooo I guess that means this was a good idea?I think the parents would have been better off buying a dog, so they could check it out before bringing it home and make sure that it doesn't have any physical shortcomings that would require multiple serious surgeries to make it more acceptable and managable. Although - wait a minute - puppies are much more cute and enjoyable than grown dogs, perhaps I'm onto something here...** runs off to patent eternal puppy **
lokotinskyJan 5, 2007
Ok...spelling and grammar errors aside...There are plenty of surgeries performed on children only days or hours old. Do they experience pain? Ummm, I'd guess 'yes'. In fact, how about circumcision? Many, many countries and cultures routinely (and have for years) subjected days old male infants to this procedure. For little reason other than religious/cultural status quo* And guess what guys? It's done without anesthetic. (Do I sense a collective gasp and wince from the males in the audience???) Now *that's* inflicting pain for no real reason. Medicine plays God every day. We 'save' lives that would exist for only brief seconds. The advances in medical treatment are what brought these parents to this terrible decison. A child this profoundly retarded would have had a drastically reduced life expectancy in the past. What would I do if I were faced with this dilemna? I don't know. And therefore I feel that I cannot pass judgement on these parents. And although I do not profess to be a Bible scholar, did not God himself say that only he has the right to judge others?Before any of you reply that recent findings suggest a decrease in heterosexual HIV transmission with circumcised males, I'm aware of that fact; but this isn't Africa and that is a new finding
f54280Jan 7, 2007
Well, I do agree with you, and would personally have not kept a "human beeing" with such a disability.But this is a personal choice, and I accept the fact that religious people would not see euthanasy as an option for their own child. Hence the path they choosed.(And, btw, I think you are on something with the eternal puppy...)