Read other letters about this article
I've been to the parents' blog. What troubles me about this case is the statement, hidden in a group of other statements about Ashley's health, that Ashley having a child-like body is more dignified and appropriate, considering her mental age.
I'm having to guess at what that means, but I'm concerned that it may mean, "Having to care for a 'pillow angel' is poignant and cute. Having to care for a whopping grown woman who's disabled is embarrassing and awkward."
That's why the cutesey-poo term "pillow angel" is squicking me out. This child is not an angel; she's alive. She's a living, human girl with an underdeveloped brain. Not an after-school special. Her condition is an ugly reality that can't be prettified by stunting her growth and blogging about how adorable it is that she stays where she's put, as if suddenly disabled people were hot decorator items. Pillow angels! Gotta get me one of those!
If her parents think that the idea of a retarded adult is undignified, there's a problem, and it's not a problem that needs to be fixed by surgery. If her parents are mutilating their child because they have issues with dealing with her sexual development, there's a problem. There's a real problem, in my mind, when they try to promote "the Ashley treatment" for other disabled children who may not be as severely handicapped as their daughter. Disabled people already have to deal more than enough with the discomfort others feel about their sexuality.
And, on another note, we don't think it's okay to stunt a cat's growth using hormones because kittens are cuter. It bugs me that we do to people what we wouldn't do to a cat. I'm not seeing a clear benefit from the treatment which matches the risks of major surgery and massive bombardment by hormones. Periods are not life-endangering; caretakers can molest girls whether they are sexually mature or not; being difficult to lift and manipulate is an inconvenience, not a health condition.