Peter Pan Surgery threads merged

logansoldcigar

Superhero
Joined
Jul 2, 2002
Messages
8,971
Reaction score
0
Points
31
Treatment keeps girl child-sized

Ashley's parents refer to their daughter as "Pillow Angel"
Parents of a severely disabled girl in the US have revealed that they are keeping her child-sized in order to give her a better life.
The nine-year-old, named Ashley, has the mental ability of a three-month-old baby and cannot walk or talk.

Along with hormone doses to limit her growth, Ashley's parents also opted for surgery to block breast growth and had her uterus and appendix removed.

They say the treatment will help to improve her quality of life.

Ashley's parents, Seattle residents who have not given their names, went public over their daughter's treatment in a blog launched on 1 January.

Their decision came after information about Ashley's case was published in a US medical journal last year, triggering considerable debate and criticism.

Ashley's parents say that because she will remain the weight of a child, it will be easier for them to move her around, bathe her and involve her in family activities - movement that will benefit her physical and mental well-being.

Dr Douglas Diekema from the University of Washington in Seattle, who was on the ethics committee that gave the go-ahead for Ashley's treatment, told the BBC that the panel agreed "because the parents convinced us it was in fact in this little girl's best interests".

"If she were smaller it would be much easier for them to continue to provide a much more personal level of care," he said.

"Dad is frequently the one that lifts her from one place to the other, so if she gets bigger that becomes much more difficult, as they get older it becomes more difficult. At that point in time they would be forced to consider using a mechanical lift, which is much more impersonal."

'Improve her life'

Ashley's parents wrote on the site: "A fundamental and universal misconception about the treatment is that it is intended to convenience the caregiver.

The oestrogen treatment is not what is grotesque here. Rather, it is the prospect of having a full-grown and fertile woman endowed with the mind of a baby

Ashley's parents
"Rather, the central purpose of the treatment is to improve Ashley's quality of life."

Ashley has static encephalopathy, a rare brain condition which will not improve. Her parents call her "Pillow Angel", because she does not move from wherever they put her, usually on a pillow.

The couple decided three years ago to take steps to minimise their daughter's adult height and weight.

In July 2004 Ashley began hormone treatment, through patches on the skin, that is expected to reduce her untreated height by 20% and weight by 40%.

Abuse fears

Ashley's parents said the decision to remove their daughter's uterus and breast buds was for the girl's comfort and safety.

"Ashley has no need for her uterus since she will not be bearing children," they said, adding that the decision means she will not experience the menstrual cycle and the bleeding and discomfort commonly associated with it.

The operation also removed the possibility of pregnancy if Ashley were ever the victim of sexual abuse, they said.

The removal of the girl's breast buds was also done in part to avoid sexual abuse, but was carried out primarily so she would not experience discomfort when lying down, the parents said.

The couple emphasised their love for their daughter and said the amount of criticism their choice of treatment attracted had surprised them.

"If the concern has something to do with the girl's dignity being violated, then I have to protest by arguing that the girl lacks the cognitive capacity to experience any sense of indignity," they said.

"The oestrogen treatment is not what is grotesque here. Rather, it is the prospect of having a full-grown and fertile woman endowed with the mind of a baby."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6229799.stm
 
woah.
it seems like the right thing to do, but it really does raise so many more concerns.
what about people who are born with other degenerative diseases?
should they have their sexual reproductive organs removed for their safety?
or should that choice be left up to them?
and being a child forever?
that's like the Kirsten Dunst character from Interview with the Vampire.
and we all know she wasn't happy with that!
i mean she killed Lestat for crying out loud!
 
wowzers... that's kind of a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.
 
Mr. Credible said:
wowzers... that's kind of a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.
Explain to me how they are 'damned if they don't', other than having to look after their kid like the thousands of others who have children born with disabilities?
 
The whole heavy lifting thing....
 
I'm not in argument mode right now...

















































...are you asking for an argument?
 
The Spawn said:
are you asking for an argument?
Possibly. I was merely asking Mr. Credible to explain to me how the parents were damned if they had not gone ahead with those ridiculous treatments.
 
Why are they ridiculous?

Are you saying the treatments are inane, or that the results meant to be gained by using them are?
 
The Spawn said:
Why are they ridiculous?

Are you saying the treatments are inane, or that the results meant to be gained by using them are?
I'm saying they aren't treatments at all.
 
And every pedophile on the internet simultaniously stoped and started praising the god of perverted child abuse. :o
 
I agree with logansoldcigar, it does indeed open a major can of worms. However, I can understand the parents point of view. Since the mind will never achieve adult hood why not let the body follow suite. It will allow them to take care of her longer and not have to put her into an institution until they are either extremely old and frail or dead. It will also prevent a lot of nastiness with menstration (not just the pain of cramps, which are impossible to explain to a 3 year old, but the whole messiness of pads and tampons).
 
i just read that and i have no idea what i think about it.
 
Kaboom said:
i just read that and i have no idea what i think about it.

Yeah, its an odd one. Im not sure i think its right, but i can fully understand where her parents are coming from.
 
Surgery to stunt girl’s growth sparks debate
Parents say drastic treatment allows them to take better care of their child


In a case fraught with ethical questions, the parents of a severely mentally and physically disabled child have stunted her growth to keep their little “pillow angel” a manageable and more portable size.

The bedridden 9-year-old girl had her uterus and breast tissue removed at a Seattle hospital and received large doses of hormones to halt her growth. She is now 4-foot-5; her parents say she would otherwise probably reach a normal 5-foot-6.

Some ethicists question the parents’ claim that the drastic treatment will benefit their daughter and allow them to continue caring for her at home.

The case has captured attention nationwide and abroad. “Offensive if not perverse,” wrote one person on MSNBC.com's bulletin board. “This smacks of eugenics, but I understand the parents thought process,” another wrote.

Right or wrong, the couple’s decision highlights a dilemma thousands of parents face in struggling to care for severely disabled children as they grow up.

“This particular treatment, even if it’s OK in this situation, and I think it probably is, is not a widespread solution and ignores the large social issues about caring for people with disabilities,” Dr. Joel Frader, a medical ethicist at Chicago’s Children’s Memorial Hospital, said Thursday. “As a society, we do a pretty rotten job of helping caregivers provide what’s necessary for these patients.”

The case involves a girl identified only as Ashley on a blog her parents created after her doctors wrote about her treatment in October’s Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine. The journal did not disclose the parents’ names or where they live; the couple do not identify themselves on their blog, either.

Left in an infant state
Shortly after birth, Ashley had feeding problems and showed severe developmental delays. Her doctors diagnosed static encephalopathy, which means severe brain damage. They do not know what caused it.

Her condition has left her in an infant state, unable to sit up, roll over, hold a toy or walk or talk. Her parents say she will never get better. She is alert, startles easily, and smiles, but does not maintain eye contact, according to her parents, who call the brown-haired little girl their “pillow angel.”

She goes to school for disabled children, but her parents care for her at home and say they have been unable to find suitable outside help.

An editorial in the medical journal called “the Ashley treatment” ill-advised and questioned whether it will even work. But her parents says it has succeeded so far.

She had surgery in July 2004 and recently completed the hormone treatment. She weighs about 65 pounds, and is about 13 inches shorter and 50 pounds lighter than she would be as an adult, according to her parents’ blog.

“Ashley’s smaller and lighter size makes it more possible to include her in the typical family life and activities that provide her with needed comfort, closeness, security and love: meal time, car trips, touch, snuggles, etc.,” her parents wrote.

University of Pennsylvania bioethicist and MSNBC.com columnist Art Caplan said the case is troubling and questioned how preventing normal growth could benefit the patient. Treatment that is not for a patient’s direct benefit “only seems wrong to me,” Caplan said.

But Dr. Benjamin Wilfond, a pediatric bioethicist at Children’s Hospital, said that while he "was a little startled" when he first learned of Ashley’s case, he understood the parents’ decision.

"In this case, being short is a benefit to the child," Wilfond told NBC affiliate KING-TV of Seattle. "There are other parents that make decisions to make their children taller because that may be a benefit to the child. And so I think what all these cases have in common is an intention to help the child."

Comfort and convenience cited
Ashley’s parents say keeping her small will help reduce risks for bedsores and other conditions that can afflict bedridden patients. Also, they say preventing her from going through puberty means she won’t experience the discomfort of having periods or growing breasts that might develop breast cancer, which runs in the family.

“Even though caring for Ashley involves hard and continual work, she is a blessing and not a burden,” her parents’ blog says. Still, they wrote, “Unless you are living the experience ... you have no clue what it is like to be the bedridden child or their caregivers.”

Deborah Feldman of KING-TV contributed to this report.

© 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16473471/
 
It would suck to have a long, lanky, busty Pillow Angel. *shrug*
 
PH2005061800536.jpg
 
Slippery slope I think. Today theyre doing it for "medical reasons", tomorow theyl be doing it for fashion, then in 10 years time all the paedophiles will be doing it so they can "hang out" with all the 8 year olds without looking suspicous.
 
Obviously this kind of surgery would have to be closely regulated, but if the kid is one step above being brain-dead, as in this case, I don't see what it would hurt.
 
Doctors are really focusing on the important things.
 
mightiest_mortal said:
Slippery slope I think. Today theyre doing it for "medical reasons", tomorow theyl be doing it for fashion, then in 10 years time all the paedophiles will be doing it so they can "hang out" with all the 8 year olds without looking suspicous.

I can totally see this happening, if not already. What kind of people do you think really run the fashion industry? :cmad::cmad::cmad:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"