It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Parents Surgically Keep Their Daughter Child-Size

page: 6
5
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 01:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by chissler

Originally posted by riley
They won't be there to give her proper care anyway.. they will eventually die and someone else will care for her so that argument only works if they intend to outlive her.


Do you realize how absurd that actually sounds? They will eventually die? I mean, C'mon, they would live for another forty years. Who are we to say anything of the sort?


Really? How is saying that a child is likly to outlive it's parents Absurd?


Let's Review the facts:

1. The Article says Ashley is 9 Years Old!

2. Both of her Parents are adults, meaning they are adlest in their 20's but more likly early 30's.

So, in you oppinion the idea of someone who's 9 living longer then someone who is around 30 years older is absurd?


No one is saying they are dying, only that they will die one day. Let's say they live until they are 85 (just a random number). This will give them about say 54 more years. In 54 years, Ashley will be 63 years old. At that point, she will still need care like she does now.

What about this is so Absurd in your mind? Care to explane your logic to those of us scratching our heads?

Tim




posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 01:52 PM
link   
No, the notion of Ashley outliving her parents is not absurd. The fact that you would base your decision on something that may not come into play for another 6 or 7 decades is absurd. We have criticized the parents because Ashley "may" outlive them. But we have no reason to believe they will not live until their ripe old age.

We can not base a decision on something that may not occur for another half century. Not in this scenario anyways.

That is what is absurd.

My apologies if I did not make that clear.



posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 02:15 PM
link   
Chissler,

Hey, it's all good! Thanks for clearing up the misunderstanding. Personally, I like your logic, when you put it in context.

Good answer, next time be careful to clarify your thought for the rest of us. It's a basic mistake, but as we just saw it can change the conversation radically. Good thinking!


Tim



posted on Jan, 22 2007 @ 03:59 PM
link   
I agree. Sometimes side points get lost in the shuffle, this being a prime example.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 05:19 PM
link   
You said they are trying to FURTHER HER LIFE !?!?! SHOW ME WHERE TAKING AWAY ANYTHING FROM A PERSON IS FURTHERING THIER LIFE !??!?!! And isn't it about the Quality of Life they would be after if they loved her ??? Not just trying to make it easier on them .. to take care of her !?!?!?! Sounds alittle selfish again .. But I am not even going here I am sorry that I even wrote this ...


Originally posted by chissler

Originally posted by riley
Funny that.. it is a discussion board..


Where did I say you were not entitled to your opinion? But your clouding your opinion with facts.


Originally posted by riley
How about the opinion that all people, including the disabled, are entitled to basic human rights? She is her own individual. Where do people draw the line.. chopping the legs of paraplegics or only the paraplegics with low IQs? Chissler.. I'd like to know under what circumstances you think it's okay to deliberately [further] disable someone. How disabled do they have to be before it becomes morally okay?


You have no idea how much I agree with you. Believe me, you and I are in the same corner doing battle for one another. I am a firm believer in every individual having rights, hence my stance on capital punishment and my leniency on crime. But, with this scenario, some grayness has been injected. The parents are attempting to further their daughters life by taking the steps they have. They are not violating any rights because Ashley can not speak for herself. We can only accept the judgment of the parents, who would know what Ashley would want more than anyone.

Our difference of opinion comes from the fact that I do not see this as a violation of any rights. In fact, I see this as a solidification of Ashley's right to life.



Originally posted by riley
The 'effort' of maiming their daughter. I know many people who care for disabled relatives.. it's never occured to them to injure them further. Are you even going to address the other points I made? The post op pain. The pumping full of hormones? Imagine the outcry if this was done to a normal child. I can guarentee it would be called inhumane. How is this not inhumane?


Because Ashley is not a "normal" child. She can not function whatsoever. This post op pain, you can only speculate to the degree of suffering she is enduring. And yes, many people do care for disabled people. But are they 100% immobile? Ashley is dead weight, she can not support herself at all. Her mother can not properly care for her if she reaches a certain weight.

It is obvious that Ashley's parents can not properly care for her if she were to grow to a standard size. So they have two options. Send her off to "specialized care" where you can only hope that she receives the treatment she deserves. Opening the door for possible abuse, sexual assault, etc. Or, take a few steps to insure the proper care on behalf of the parents and provide an adequate level of care for the child.

It is a fact that Ashley is in better care with her parents rather than institutionalized.



Originally posted by riley
In fact they did.. at least waiting doesn't permanently damage her. In regard to medical advances.. there is that much money being poured into stem cell research and into brain damage that it's a probabilty that many disabled people could be cured.


But waiting would result in so many other problems. Ashley's mother would be incapable of physically moving her. She would be forced to remain in one position for most of the day, and severe bed sores would surely develop.

I don't mean to take a one sided approach here. I fully see where you are coming from, and I can only hope you see where I am coming from.

The parents had a very tough decision to make. No matter what they decided, there were some serious pros and cons to both scenarios. They weighed the facts and ultimately made a decision. As "one-sided" as I am appearing to be, I am merely trying to defend the parents and the decision they made.



Originally posted by riley
They won't be there to give her proper care anyway.. they will eventually die and someone else will care for her so that argument only works if they intend to outlive her.


Do you realize how absurd that actually sounds? They will eventually die? I mean, C'mon, they would live for another forty years. Who are we to say anything of the sort?



Originally posted by riley
They carved out her breast buds, her uterus, pumped her full of hormones and are making sure she stays the size of a child for the rest of her life. Theres no speculating here; only stating the obvious.


Terms like, "carved" are slightly dramatic.

You have your opinion, I have mine. The fact is, this was the parents right to make the decision. You are taking an approach to this situation that is overtly one-sided. You make it seem that this was an easy decision that the parents obviously messed up. When the truth is actually quite the opposite. This was a very tough ethical dilemma. And as any ethical question is, neither option had a perfect outcome.

I'm not prepared to fault someone for trying to make the best out of a bad situation. I think some of us should be more open-minded and respectful to the problems of others.

I don't think the parents have taken much "relief" from their decision.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 05:21 PM
link   
NO IT IS ABSURD THAT HER PARENTS DIDN'T /OR AREN'T looking for thier DAUGHTERS BEST .... Just the fact that they want to TAKE CARE OF HER ... Watch what happens to her parents in the next two decades ... WILL BE INTERESTING TO SEE WHO IS TAKING CARE OF HER !!


Originally posted by chissler
No, the notion of Ashley outliving her parents is not absurd. The fact that you would base your decision on something that may not come into play for another 6 or 7 decades is absurd. We have criticized the parents because Ashley "may" outlive them. But we have no reason to believe they will not live until their ripe old age.

We can not base a decision on something that may not occur for another half century. Not in this scenario anyways.

That is what is absurd.

My apologies if I did not make that clear.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Deus_Brandon
NO IT IS ABSURD THAT HER PARENTS DIDN'T /OR AREN'T looking for thier DAUGHTERS BEST .... Just the fact that they want to TAKE CARE OF HER ... Watch what happens to her parents in the next two decades ... WILL BE INTERESTING TO SEE WHO IS TAKING CARE OF HER !!



Originally posted by Deus_Brandon
You said they are trying to FURTHER HER LIFE !?!?! SHOW ME WHERE TAKING AWAY ANYTHING FROM A PERSON IS FURTHERING THIER LIFE !??!?!! And isn't it about the Quality of Life they would be after if they loved her ??? Not just trying to make it easier on them .. to take care of her !?!?!?! Sounds alittle selfish again .. But I am not even going here I am sorry that I even wrote this ...


So why did you?

1. Caps are highly unnecessary.
2. No need to quote the entire post. It makes the page difficult to navigate.

Please tell me how you are in any position to say what is in the best interests for Ashley? How do you know that it is in Ashley's best interest to of not undergone the surgeries she has? Or should not have been injected with the hormones? What book did you read that gives you this almighty information? I am sure that the parents would of loved to talk to you before making this decision, because apparently you know something they don't.

The fact of the matter is, as we've all said before, nobody knows what is the best decision. All that we can do is weigh the facts and hope for the best. Which is exactly what Ashley's parents have done. This was no easy decision, and just like the other side of the coin, it comes with some negatives as well.

Her parents are well aware of this, but they stand by their decision.

But I am interested to know how it is your aware of what is in Ashley's best interest. Your insertion of capital letters, on such a regular basis, gives the impression your pretty sure of yourself.

Please inform us.



posted on Jan, 24 2007 @ 05:56 PM
link   
A fundamental issue that I've not seen questioned is one of parental rights. Since when is a parent answerable to the state or the court of public opinion on providing for the best interests of their child(ren)? That's a slippery slope on which we don't need to start sledding. Next it will be: smokers should have their children taken away. Homosexuals should not be allowed to adopt. Conservatives and conspiracy theorists will need to register with the appropriate agency and attend re-education classes before being allowed to infect, er, I mean affect young minds. Parents with more than 2 children who file for bankruptcy at any time in their lives for any reason must immediately be sterilized so that the state (and its public) will not be financially burdened by their inability to manage money. In fact, we should probably just reinstate the eugenics program we had at the early part of this century and sterilize all that the state deems unfit. While we're at it, we could make abortion of defective fetuses mandatory so that we don't have to deal with such emotionally charged issues at all.

The parents are caring for their permanently infantacized child, have no evidence for neglect or abuse and they ARE the parents.

I don't care for the fact that my neighbors let their children run around in short sleeve, thin fabric shirts with no coats (or shoes) in the dead of winter but rather than criticizing their methods (and who knows what poverty), I brought shoes and warm clothes and coats to them (left anonymously on porch). How many of you would be willing to spend a week of your time caring for Ashley's activities of daily living? She must be cared for as one would a 3 month old infant. A sick infant at that. The parents are doing the best they can for THEIR child. No one can expect or demand more. Nor is it any one else's business. (steps off soap box)



posted on Jan, 25 2007 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by whitewave
A fundamental issue that I've not seen questioned is one of parental rights. Since when is a parent answerable to the state or the court of public opinion on providing for the best interests of their child(ren)? That's a slippery slope on which we don't need to start sledding. Next it will be: smokers should have their children taken away. Homosexuals should not be allowed to adopt. Conservatives and conspiracy theorists will need to register with the appropriate agency and attend re-education classes before being allowed to infect, er, I mean affect young minds. Parents with more than 2 children who file for bankruptcy at any time in their lives for any reason must immediately be sterilized so that the state (and its public) will not be financially burdened by their inability to manage money. In fact, we should probably just reinstate the eugenics program we had at the early part of this century and sterilize all that the state deems unfit.


Time Out! Hold ON! I'm all for perental rights, this was never the point in question here. Now you are getiing unreasnable.

The point, as I see it, is Where is the line between Parental Athority and Child Abuse? Wether you like it or not that line exists even with stuff like this!



The parents are caring for their permanently infantacized child, have no evidence for neglect or abuse and they ARE the parents.


Well, that depends, is removing a child's sex organs just because you don't expect them to ever be a parent Abuse?
Some of us feel that is abuse! That is the issue being debated here!


I don't care for the fact that my neighbors let their children run around in short sleeve, thin fabric shirts with no coats (or shoes) in the dead of winter but rather than criticizing their methods (and who knows what poverty), I brought shoes and warm clothes and coats to them (left anonymously on porch).


How admiralable of you! Now you are starting to impress me. People say they care, but you have taken the time to act on it!


How many of you would be willing to spend a week of your time caring for Ashley's activities of daily living?


I would! I work with children like Ashley already as an aid for special needs children on a volinteer basis while I'm working on my AA in Special Education! Some of the children I've worked with over the years can't do much more than move their eyes to let you know they are awake. I'm now into my 6th year of doing this kind of work, and I love it! I'm not going to tell you it's all fun and games though, because it's not! Working with and caring for a child like Ashley is Physically and Emotionally Exausting!

Here are a few of the tasks that go with the territory(My "Short" List):

-Feeding (trought a G-Tube) which requires you to measure out fomual, pour it into a bag simular to an IV bag, setting the flow control (or pump), and checking every so often to see that it is flowing correctly

-Changing Dipers

-Postioning: Surprise! you have to move the child often and change the way he or she is sitting or laying. Also, you need to check for bed sores, which can develop quickly if you don't pay attention

- Medication: Many of these children take medication for seizures or other things. Some take as many as 5 or 6 different Perscriptions

- Asperation: some kids need mucas build-ups sucked from the throat and nasail air way as often as every 30min, or they will choke! This gose around the clock. How's starting your morning at 1:30 A.M. sucking mucas from a child's nose and throat so he (or she) can breath sound? (better set your clock earily :lol
B.T.W. you don't get to bed until 11:45 PM- 12:15 AM on a "Good Night"


She must be cared for as one would a 3 month old infant. A sick infant at that. The parents are doing the best they can for THEIR child. No one can expect or demand more. Nor is it any one else's business. (steps off soap box)


Surprise! I already knew that! You may wish to reread the "Chore List" I posted for you above.

Now for my big question: Would you do all of this?


(If your answer is yes, then we'll discuss your next point of what is the "Best" for a child.)

Tim



posted on Jan, 25 2007 @ 06:34 PM
link   
Tim,
As a critical care nurse, I do this sort of thing for a living on a daily basis. It's exhausting but at the end of 12 hours I can go home and collapse in my easy chair. For the parents, there is NEVER a break. Plus, the people I take care of are not MY children. It's sad to think of them in that condition but then I go home and hug my healthy children and say a little prayer of thanks. I can't even imagine the never-ending, relentless, heart-breaking, gut-wrenching emotional toll that these parents endure on a daily basis.
And as for them outliving this child, it is highly unlikely. The continual stress, sleep-deprivation, financial burden and "close calls" with her health care issues WILL take a toll. I'd be surprised if they lived another 20 years at this rate.
I've taken care of a lot of cerebral palsy (C.P.) kids. They used to not have a life expectancy much past 20 (with excellent care). Now they live to 30 and beyond. Yes, improvements in healthcare and even cures can be expected in the future but in the mean time, these parents need to consider that health care may not always be available. I'm sure the type of health care they have for Ashley is a home health care agency. The turn-over in that field is astronomical. Nurses quit, move on, etc. and then you have no one for the day. With a critical nation wide nursing shortage, getting a replacement is not as easy as ordering a pizza. How are the parents supposed to hold jobs to pay for her astronomical health care costs? How is even one parent supposed to hold a job that has an insurance plan when they can't get a decent night's sleep?
I worked for a family once that had a chronically ill child and in 9 years they had maxed out their 1 million dollar insurance policy for LIFELONG healthcare. On ONE child. The rest of the family had nothing. Their child had the mentality of a 3 year old (was 10 years old). The parents were in their early 30's and looked 110. Their other child was constantly put on the "back burner" and had behavioral problems in his desparate search for attention. Their sick child had 165 grand mal seizures a week (give or take) and the isometric muscle building inherent with frequent grand mal seizures had left this 10 year old (mentally and emotionally 3 years old) child a danger to others. I came in one day and found him attacking his mother. He had her on the floor with her arm behind her back. If I hadn't come in when I did, he would have broken her arm. As a "3 year old", he couldn't be held responsible for his actions but can you imagine this child when he hits puberty? (shudders)
To the woman with a sick child who has "disc problems" from carrying her 110 pound child: I, too, have ruptured and herniated discs from lifting people that are too heavy for me and, as a result, have had to take a serious cut in pay because I am no longer able to continue lifting people that are too heavy for me. I thought I'd stop that self-destructive behavior before I needed a caretaker as well. I sincerely hope she never gets to that point.
Obviously, the parents have had a great deal of experience with healthcare and made the decisions for Ashley based on their experience and observations. Having strangers in your home is a temptation to steal, sexually abuse, etc. Imagine how Ashley would feel being pregnant at "3 months old"?
I've been in the business long enough that I can remember when there were moral issues over heart transplants, organ donation and the like. These are now considered common place and life-saving options. Hopefully, the available medical treatments that Ashley's parents have availed themselves of in the care of THEIR child will eventually be viewed as just another treatment option.



posted on Jan, 26 2007 @ 06:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by whitewave
Tim,
As a critical care nurse, I do this sort of thing for a living on a daily basis. It's exhausting but at the end of 12 hours I can go home and collapse in my easy chair.


I must say I have a lot of respect for you now that I understand the point of view you are coming into this discussion with. I still have reserved feeling about this issue, but I see the logic in some of your points.

Tim



posted on Jan, 26 2007 @ 06:54 PM
link   
Tim,
Well shut my mouth! Just when I had my dander up and ready to argue bioethics with all takers, you come along and take all the wind out of my sails with your reasonable consideration. hrumph!

Healthcare professionals, especially critical care/oncology/emergency room, etc. see this same argument presented every day. Most people outside the profession don't really understand the reality of health care and expect that we secretly have some magic wand in our pockets to poof away all pain, disease, unpleasantness. It just aint so. Would to G_D that we did. Most of us in critical care call it a "house of torture" because everything we do hurts and, in the end, most of it only prolongs the inevitable. Sometimes it's much kinder to just "let them go". Can't really explain that to the loved ones who hold out against all hope. Most of what we do is buy time for the family to come to grips with the hopeless reality of the situation.
Ashley's parents have seen that hopeless reality and nobly decided to bear the burden themselves. They have proven themselves to be realistic in their expectations for her condition and acted accordingly by doing whatever is necessary to extend her life and quality of life with the means available to them. I commend their sacrifice. Make no mistake-what they are doing is a sacrifice. If they left her healthcare to hirelings who could immediately assess that Ashley is "hopeless" and the parents "selfish to keep her alive", Ashley would probably have died long ago. As a large (and growing larger) "3 month old", she really doesn't need breasts or a uterus and those things will be of no benefit to her, EVER. I sincerely doubt she'll miss them. The temporary disadvantage of having to go through surgery and its recovery will be far outweighed by the benefit of not getting pregnant, not having pressure ulcers on her breasts (OUCH!), or bedsores any where else. As a conscientious nurse, I recognize that I am slower to go turn really heavy, "dead weight" patients as frequently as I do patients whose weights are more "reasonable". There are a lot of nurses who are not as conscientious (and MRSA & septic shock are real considerations of wound care on bedridden patients).
It really pains me that these poor parents must endure the "cursing their darkness" of so many who find their methods unacceptable rather than "lighting a candle" by offering to help with Ashley's care. Anyone can do it for a week or two...it's the lifetime that gets ya.



posted on Jan, 29 2007 @ 08:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by whitewave
I worked for a family once that had a chronically ill child and in 9 years they had maxed out their 1 million dollar insurance policy for LIFELONG healthcare. On ONE child. The rest of the family had nothing. Their child had the mentality of a 3 year old (was 10 years old). The parents were in their early 30's and looked 110. Their other child was constantly put on the "back burner" and had behavioral problems in his desparate search for attention. Their sick child had 165 grand mal seizures a week (give or take) and the isometric muscle building inherent with frequent grand mal seizures had left this 10 year old (mentally and emotionally 3 years old) child a danger to others. I came in one day and found him attacking his mother. He had her on the floor with her arm behind her back. If I hadn't come in when I did, he would have broken her arm. As a "3 year old", he couldn't be held responsible for his actions but can you imagine this child when he hits puberty? (shudders)

...

Obviously, the parents have had a great deal of experience with healthcare and made the decisions for Ashley based on their experience and observations. Having strangers in your home is a temptation to steal, sexually abuse, etc. Imagine how Ashley would feel being pregnant at "3 months old"?
I've been in the business long enough that I can remember when there were moral issues over heart transplants, organ donation and the like. These are now considered common place and life-saving options. Hopefully, the available medical treatments that Ashley's parents have availed themselves of in the care of THEIR child will eventually be viewed as just another treatment option.


First off ... thank you for the work you provide and the unique perspective you can bring in this discussion. I grew up with a sister who was born paraplegic from spina bifida and with water on the brain ... as well as a brother who had many, many complications from being 2 months preemie and has had CPR performed on him, by my parents, at least a dozen times (wasn't supposed to live to 3, but he's 27 now). In grade school it was not uncommon for me to come home and have a neighbor tell me I was staying with them because one my siblings was back in the hospital.

As one of the middle of 4 children ... me and the eldest were perfectly healthy. I can attest to the fact that in these types of family situations it is completely normal for the healthy kids to get a lot less attention and are required to be somewhat self sufficient. I also saw my mom go through a few nervous breakdowns from all the stress. Given all that, I wouldn't trade my family dynamics for the world ... having to live in a near constant crisis for about a decade allowed me to know where to set priorities in life and to deeply value my family.

I truly believe that Ashley's family made the best decision for her case. They know her, love her and live with her. They don't want to take any opportunity away from her .. they simply want to be able to physically provide for her care for the many decades to come. This isn't a child who sits in a room, ignored by the family ... they take great steps to include her in their daily life and family outings. There is no way I can imagine being in those parents shoes and I absolutely refuse to pass judgement on them. All the decisions they have made have been from their heart.

Time recently did an article on Ashley and one of the quote's from one of the doctors stuck out for me:



"The argument that a beneficial treatment should not be used because it might be misused is itself a slippery slope," he says. "If we did not use therapies available because they could be misused, we'd be practicing very little medicine."



Time Magazine Article

For me that rang very true, medicine is about extending lives and making life more liveable. Regardless of any future potential uses the main concern for conisderation was what is right for Ashley.



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 08:32 AM
link   
Well said. I couldn't agree more. And kudos to you for your strength and fortitude which have left you full of compassion rather than bitterness.
Family IS what it's all about. In 26 years I have never once heard someone on their death bed say, "I wish I'd spent more time at the office", or "I regret that I won't be able to finish landscaping the yard". No, it's always, "tell my daughter I love her", "I should have apologized to my brother. we fought over nothing", etc.
To shamelessly steal a recruiting motto and twist it for my own uses: having a family is the toughest job you'll ever love.



posted on Jan, 30 2007 @ 10:39 AM
link   
Well , I just wanted to say that I am very proud to be a part of this board and all of the caring/loving although sometimes quite unagreeable people here .... You are are needed here and thanks for all the information ... Helped me see views I ever thought possible.




top topics



 
5
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join