Parents defend decision to keep disabled girl small

LA Times ^ | January 3, 2007 | Sam Howe Verhovek

[Hildy]

True. I shall do that.

[ican'tbelieveit]

I am 6 ft. I hit that by age 14. I finally stopped growing tall, but my feet grew until I was in my mid 20's.

[Hildy]

Wow. You mean your feet, like where your shoes go? My husband wears a size 15 in a tennis shoe!!! Hey, I see you joined up on my birthday, in the year 2000. If I remember correctly, that was the day they took Elian Gonzales. Is that what brought you here?

[miliantnutcase]

Might be less stress on her organs to keep her that size. I dunno...

[theanonymouslurker]

I would call a hysterectomy and a mastectomy removal of body parts.

And again, no answer to my question.

[ican'tbelieveit]

Yeah, for a woman, I wear a size 11 1/2 in mens. I have to really hunt to find decent womens dress shoes, but sports shoes I go straight to mens sizes.

I did sign up because of Elian Gonzales. I will never forget waking up that morning and seeing federal agents being used in a custody battle that way...

[armymarinemom]

I'm sick and tired of people trying to justify selfishness as "compassion" - it's SICK. It's ungodly. If God wanted her small, He'd have made her stay that way.

She wasn't born with a feeding tube either.

[Mr. Blonde]

House was on his A-game in that episode. I loved his conversations with the mom.

I wonder what he would say about this case. I think he would probably be in favor of the treatment the parent's chose.

[teenyelliott]

Excuse me, sir, are you calling me a lib?

I can only assume by your oh-so-pleasant response that you disagree with the parents. Fine. But until you have to lug around a full grown adult who can not take care of herself, I think you should reserve judgment.

I did not state my opinion of what they have done either way. As a parent, I can only imagine the heartbreak they have already gone through. I have no idea what I would do in the same situation, and until you have been there, you have no idea what you would do, either.

[theanonymouslurker]

Again, I am not a veteran, and nor do any of my family currently serve in the military. Am I not allowed to support the War on Terror? Because, according to your logic, I would not be permitted to comment on any military affair because "I am not in their position" (your words).

Your logic fails, sorry. People are entitled to their opinion regardless of their "position" so long as their opinion is based upon reasonableness and objectivity.

And, presumably as a parent who does not wish to "lug" around a full grown adult, I suspect that you would be in favor of amputating this poor girl's arms and legs for the sake of your carrying convenience as well. Indeed, she doesn't use her limbs anyway and they could get (*shudder*) bed sores or something. And what's an elective amputation or four after a needless hysterectomy and double mastectomy anyway? /sarc.

[huldah1776]

Those who protested were probably pro-life. The only fear I have of making changes to this girl is that adult stem-cell research may have been able to help her in the future. Keeping her at home is best, of course, but the rape excuse is bazaar, as everyone is in danger.

[mollynme]

Why should they amputate anything when they have already found the solution to retard her physical growth? That's certainly not an example of "reasonableness".
In my 20+ years of patient care, I have had to deal with the unfortunate results of well-meaning families who were not physically able to take care of full grown disabled relatives.
Your sarcastic comment about "*shudder* bed sores" shows a total lack of understanding on your part and is a reminder of why people who don't know what they are talking about should keep their opinions to themselves.
Bed sores (pressure ulcers) are erosions of the skin and can be clear down to the bone, taking months of medical care to heal. They often lead to sepsis (massive infection) and have been known to be fatal. The most common cause is from allowing a disabled person to sit for long periods of time along with poor skin care - both of which occur when a caregiver is unable to lift and move the disabled person as often as they should.
Go here and here and educate yourself. Then come back and say why it is only for "convenience" that they keep this child "child-sized".

[higgmeister]

I once saw a 1950's SciFi movie where a mad scientist kept his wife's brain in a jar so that she would always be with him.

[Wormwood]

I once saw a 1950's SciFi movie where a mad scientist kept his wife's brain in a jar so that she would always be with him.

If I were the mad scientist, the brain would be the *last* part I kept alive.

[nmh]

Oh, Hildy ... considering how we utterly disagreed on Terry being starved to death as "compassionate", I wouldn't expect us to agree on keeping a little one small "compassionate". Both situations are for the convenience of the caregiver. I do have to say that someone being starved to death is more heinous. Yes, I know, you don't see that as heinous - being starved to death ... as in Terri's situation in Florida.

[linda_22003]

Do you mean this classic? :)

[theanonymouslurker]

What if the parents decided that her intentionally dwarfed stature was not convenient enough for them and they decided to electively amputate her limbs, which are of no use to the child anyway? I guess you would support that decision as well, correct? Please answer this question, as none of the Nazis who support the elective removal of organs from this child even come close to addressing this issue which I have raised about four times now.

And as for this: The most common cause is from allowing a disabled person to sit for long periods of time along with poor skin care - both of which occur when a caregiver is unable to lift and move the disabled person as often as they should.

No kidding. My mother and my aunt, throughout their fifties and early sixties, FOR YEARS took care of my bed ridden grandmother who suffered from severe dementia. There was nary a bed sore ever on her. Proper care eviscerates the need for elective surgeries to unnaturally stunt a disabled person's growth, and you know that.

[mollynme]

Please try a little less knee-jerk and a little more thought and compassion here. They have found a way to make their daughter's care manageable. An ethics board found their request reasonable. No ethics board is going to find the amputation of limbs to keep a child small reasonable, and you know it.
Keeping a child small by performing an elective hysterectomy, removing "almond sized" breasts and administering hormones is not at all the same thing as amputating limbs so cut the hyperbole.
Speaking of which, calling people with compassion "nazis" makes you sound like just another lib.
And, unless your grandmother was a 125+ lb quadriplegic with the potential for 70-80 more years of life, comparing her care with Ashley's is hardly fair. But then fairness is not one of your strong points, is it?

[mfreddy]

People say that God gives special children to special people. It's a good thing he did not give one to lurker or NMH. Having an elderly relative that requires care later in life is a totally different situation than a child that requires a lifetime of 24 hour care.

Neither has walked in these peoples shoes and it sounds like it's a good thing they haven't.

[Hildy]

You lose on the compassion issue on this one. The problem with you is that you only see black and white. Life is not like that. Playing God? The minute a tube was stuck down this girl's throat God was out of it. Thank God she has people who love her and people like you aren't in charge.