Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
I can't believe the doctor who said they should wait and see what would happen. Her body "might" not have outgrown her parents ability to carry her. Of course, if it had, then the only option would have been that she stay at home in bed for the rest of her life, or be institutionalized. The doctor would have shaken his head and moved on to the next patient. At least he didn't risk "mutilating" her. As for the one who said that this girl had a right to experience sexual pleasure... she is unable to consent to sexual pleasure with a partner, and probably unable to masturbate, so I have no idea how this would happen.
The worst are the "slippery slope" arguments. We shouldn't do this to Ashley because it might lead to using the treatment on less disabled people? Since when were all people, much less all disabled people, treated medically using the same methods? I'm really tired of people lumping all "disabled" people together, as if Terry Schiavo is the same as a person with a missing limb is the same as someone with cerebral palsy is the same as someone who is blind. That's pure nonsense. Each case must be treated individually. It's time that doctors, and advocates for the disabled, and the general public, started to recognize that we can't base treatment for one person on what might happen to others. People deserve to be treated in a way that is best for them, not in a way that is best for someone with some other level of disability.
I can only admire the dedication of the parents who have chosen to care for Ashley instead of putting her in a care facility. They are showing a level of love and compassion and sacrifice that would be beyond the capacity of most people. I also admire the courage of the doctors who were willing to do something unconventional to help them to retain the quality of their daughter's life. And to the critics: Pray that if anybody ever has to make decisions for you, they will show as much compassion.
I'm disgusted anyone would DARE to judge this family's decision and you really ought to go read their website, which is heartbreaking. To the person who was disturbed that the family could presume to know their child's reproductive future, YOU DON'T HAVE A FREAKIN' CLUE, DUDE. The child is comatose, ALL MENTAL DEVELOPMENT STOPPED AT AGE 3 MONTHS. She doesn't recognize her own parents! There is ZERO hope for any further development! Of course she's not going to reproduce! Good god!
As my mama said, until you've walked a mile in their moccassins, shut the heck up.
I hate it when Salon creates these pseudo-social-ethics issues out of nothing. Remember Terri Shiavo? I'm sure you all sided with the husband on that one; now you want to scold these parents for making the only decision that made sense.
grossed out,
Kay
no, my dear, YOU are demented.
Dex
Ever since this story came into the news, I'm trying to think how I'd feel if I were in Ashley's position.
I think I would be glad to be infertile; fertility is nothing but a burden when you can't care for any children you might have.
I think I would be indifferent to having my breasts removed and my growth stunted; when I think about the reasons why I enjoy having breasts and an adult body, they essentially come down to my ability to enjoy adult sexuality, which is impossible for Ashley since she'll never develop to the point where she can consent.
However, I would be creeped out, insulted, and disgusted that my parents were calling me "Pillow Angel" as though I were some kind of doll or decoration instead of a human being!
3 month olds don't detectably groove to opera. Her brain volume may have been arrested at that of 3 mos., as well as perhaps its surface topology, but her musical tastes (call them what you will), reliably positive reactions to dad's voice, etc., suggest there's development in there somewhere--to some degree--after 9 years. Don't most 3 mo. olds just sleep?
Pillow Angel? Yeah, it's creepy as hell, especially the "stays where we put her" bit. And yes, it's mutilation.
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.
I read the article, and Ashley's family's blog. Wow. No, I have never cared for a profoundly disabled person. However, I have my own recollections of when my children were babies, then and add 55 pounds, plus knowing they will never mentally grow past that stage. I can't imagine.
I think they did the right thing. If it means that Ashley can live at home, cared for by her parents, in a family with her brothers and sisters, then they've done well.
I don't buy the "slippery slope" argument either. Each case must be argued on its own merits. I can't imagine the pain of knowing that I could no longer care for an adult-sized severely disabled child, and having to abandon that child's care to strangers.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
