- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
I appreciate Salon's commitment to breaking important news, but I don't see what this piece really contributes to the debate. Despite the hospital's attempt to present a united front, I don't think anyone is surprised by the news that some people within the hospital and the ethics committee had some concerns about it. Of course they did, this is difficult new terrain. Where the focus should be is whether this treatment is justifiable in this case as presented by the hospital, and how this might apply or not apply to other similar cases.
I think despite my discomfort with the term "Pillow Angel," the hospital and parents present a well thought out justification for this unique treatment. The debate now is where to draw the line with these other cases of parents wishing to stunt the growth of or sterlize their severely developmentally disabled child. I think most of us today would feel uncomfortable making this treatment available to children with Downs syndrome, but this is a case of a girl who will never progress beyond infanthood.
