Treatment keeps girl child-sized, page 1

privacy

Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times

Topic started on 4-1-2007 @ 01:41 AM by Tokis Phoenix

"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.

Her parents decided on a course of treatment for her which has involved hormone doses to limit her growth, as well as uterine and breast surgery.

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

news.bbc.co.uk...

What are your opinions on this? Personally i think they did the right thing. An adult human being with the mental age of a 3 month old child is not going to need to be sexually fertile- i mean, it would be really messed up if someone like that got pregnant...At least the parents will not have to fear things like that happening as the years progress. So i don't think things like her breasts are going to be great loss for this reason as well.
Yes- it is messing with the natural course of nature and human growth in a seriously big way, but on the other hand such a child is not normal and would not survive at all if it were not for her parents and supporters. Although she is probably aware of her own existance to a certain extent, i doubt it is to the great extent that a normal child of her age would feel.

reply posted on 4-1-2007 @ 01:51 AM by Rocky6

But the parents did it so it's easy for themselves, more so than anything else. In saying that, I agree with what they did though. Parents who have to look after their kids with this type of disability is a big thing to conquer when they have to look after a 3 month old child all of their lives. Imagine trying to get a fully grown person into a car, who cannot walk or do anything? Would be very difficult.

Definitely the right decision. The child's has not been violated, the child will in fact have a better life.

reply posted on 4-1-2007 @ 01:57 AM by djohnsto77

Keeping the child small will make her more managable, making it much more likely her parents will be able to take care of her rather than institutionalizing her, so in that respect I agree it's probably a good thing.

reply posted on 4-1-2007 @ 02:11 AM by soficrow

I recall a number of similar cases in Australia(?) a few years ago.

Parents were treating daughters to prevent them growing "too tall" and hurting their chances for marriage.

I suspect the practice may be much more widespread than acknowledged, with various justifications.

.

reply posted on 4-1-2007 @ 02:17 AM by Tokis Phoenix

Originally posted by soficrow
I recall a number of similar cases in Australia(?) a few years ago.

Parents were treating daughters to prevent them growing "too tall" and hurting their chances for marriage.

I suspect the practice may be much more widespread than acknowledged, with various justifications.

.

In the case of marriage prospects though, i disagree with that practice as no-one will actually know the real marriage prospects of the child until she is grown up into an adult- she may actually find a more loving partner having being kept a tall girl than an average height woman. So i don't think anyone should mess which such life changing prospects until the child is an adult and can find out for themselves as to what they want in life.
But the scenario in this case it's more than just a simple and shallow cosmetic value thing- if both the child and parents welfare/quality of life can definately be greatly improved by such methods then i think it is fine and even morally correct.

Pages: ^^TOP^^