- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
This story brought up for me, not for the first time, some hard, hard truths about what it means to be human.
2000 years ago, this child would likely have died in her first year of life. If she could not function normally in her family unit, she would likely have died.
This is true for nearly all badly disabled human beings. I'm not saying that's a good thing, it's just a true thing.
The brutal truth here is that human beings are simply not wired to deal with children who are badly damaged mentally and physically. We do it, heroically, but we aren't wired for it. It causes enormous pain and difficulty for any parent called upon to care for a child like this. I have friends who have a deeply damaged child, and caring for him has upended their lives in ways you can't even imagine if you're not going through it yourself. I know I can't. Luckily they make enough money that caring for him less impossible than it would be without, but their lives revolve around him and his problems. These friends have no real life beyond him, except for their work, which proves to be a refuge from the daily difficulties they face at home. And they do not see any special blessing in this disaster. That's because there isn't one.
I'm not sure what I'm trying to say here. I do know that judging these parents, or any parents in similar situations, is simply not possible for anyone not facing what they face.
I also know that up until our brilliant use of cheap energy made the survival of these children more possible than ever before, such children died young. And that is exactly how evolution works. The imperatives of DNA are exceedingly cruel, but, in every case, eminently sensible.
