Severely disabled girl 'kept small'

news.com.au ^ | November 02, 2006

[ukie55]

Those two situations aren't even in the same league. What's wrong with you?

[mlmr]

actually I think this is a terrific idea.
She most likely had a complete hyst to keep her calm, puberty is not a pretty thing in the severely mentally retarded. and to prevent the difficulties and problems of menstruation.

[mlmr]

And there are full-grown adults with similar disabilities and their caregivers are able to take care of them.



No. there are people paid to care for them, who do it, sometimes in a slipshod mannner.

[mlmr]

That would be better than stunting her. But better still would be for the parents to sacrifice just a bit more, and care for at home even if she grows to adult-size.

-
Honey. she was stuntd from the get-go. If you can say something so callous as give a little more, to people who are sacrificing every day...you are out of touch.

[mlmr]

Overdosing her on estrogen may very likely give her breast cancer.

So what?

[adiaireton8]

No. there are people paid to care for them, who do it, sometimes in a slipshod mannner.

Yes there are full-grown adults with similar disabilities cared for by loved ones. They may get a nurse to assist them, especially for nights. But there are people who do it. As for "slipshod", it happens in the institutions as well.

-A8

[adiaireton8]

actually I think this is a terrific idea. She most likely had a complete hyst to keep her calm, puberty is not a pretty thing in the severely mentally retarded. and to prevent the difficulties and problems of menstruation.

Puberty is not pretty thing in girls of any range of mental retardation. On your logic, we should therefore give them all hysterectomies.

-A8

[adiaireton8]

she was stuntd from the get-go.

Apparently in your opinion, if a person is already stunted, then it is ethically permissible to stunt them even further.

That's like saying that if a person lost one leg, then it is ethically permissible to remove the other.

-A8

[Polybius]

The so-called right-to-death partisans have finally developed an argument that can sway me. Were I this child I would rather die, and die cruelly, than be medically altered for the convenience of my parents.

If the parents wanted "convenience", they could simply hand the child over a state institution and be done with it instead trying to keep the child at home as long as they possibly can like they desire to do.

Once a severely mentally disabled person gets too large to be physically controlled by the parents, no choice is left except institutionalization where, instead of loving parents, they will have muscular attendants to look after them.

[Chickensoup]

If a human adult is little more than vegative and infantile, you can take off both armes and legs as far as I am concerned.

[cammie]

A8 -- getting a home-care nurse takes a whole heckuva lot of money. I went through that with family members. Insurance craps out quickly on that. It's unrealistic for many families to say "get a nurse."

God bless you for your choices in your situation, but that can't help but impact your opinion of families that make a different decision about the best way to care for their child. I would ask you to have some compassion for them and their choices as well.

[Chickensoup]

Puberty is not pretty thing in girls of any range of mental retardation. On your logic, we should therefore give them all hysterectomies.

No. Your logic is dramatic, concrete and flawed. There is a huge difference between a functional and aware human and an infantile and profoundly mentally retarded human.

[adiaireton8]

Why do you think it is wrong to remove the arms and legs of a person of normal intelligence, but ethically permissible to remove the arms and legs of a person with the mind of an infant?

-A8

[Chickensoup]

Why do you think it is wrong to remove the arms and legs of a person of normal intelligence, but ethically permissible to remove the arms and legs of a person with the mind of an infant?

Management.

[adiaireton8]

I do have compassion. But compassion doesn't trump ethics. In fact, disregarding ethics for the sake of compassion is what leads to Jack Kevorkian.

-A8

[cammie]

"Overdosing her on estrogen may very likely give her breast cancer."

___

I don't think her risk would be substantially higher than the average woman given that her estrogen production has likely been drastically reduced by the hysterectomy. Especially if she had an oomphorectomy (ovaries removed) as well. The two things would likely balance each other out.

[Dianna]

The girl is now six years old. Of course there will come a day when they can't move her. Nobody disagrees with *that*. The problem is doing something unethical (i.e. stunting the girl's growth) in order to extend the time before that happens.

I'm not positive that it is unethical. Is it more or less ethical than the hysterectomy (which I do support)?

[adiaireton8]

There is a huge difference between a functional and aware human and an infantile and profoundly mentally retarded human.

Indeed there is. So how does that making whacking off the limbs of mentally retarded people ethical?????

-A8

[adiaireton8]

Management.

Please explain.

-A8

[cammie]

Well, we disagree. I don't think this is a situation of impermissable "bad means" for "good end." I think this is morally equivocal means for a good end.

Kervorkian's means was "to end life" in order "to relieve pain." I don't believe there is any comparison between ending a life to relieve pain and giving someone a "stay short" injection to permit a better life.