tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1556371561007953336.post370696576720662578..comments2024-03-16T16:44:18.220-07:00Comments on Bad Cripple: Growth Attenuation: Ethics of Treatmentwilliam Peacehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00223601480542461802noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1556371561007953336.post-84182153687780986062011-09-15T17:55:11.318-07:002011-09-15T17:55:11.318-07:00I realize that this post is aged at this point, bu...I realize that this post is aged at this point, but I'm curious reading through all of the articles on "Ashley's Treatment". My son is projected to be 6'6" tall, and has severe Athetoid CP and Dystonia...meaning his limbs thrash about all day and he has very limited control, great strength and violent movements. He is NOT cognitively impaired in the slightest. It hurts my heart DEEPLY to think of stunting his growth, yet for the quality of his care I feel it is something that we have to explore. He certainly doesn't fit the template of the "Ashley Treatment" in any way. He's very bright, but communication is very difficult, and I hope that with time he will learn to communicate more effectively. Stunting his growth would be rough beyond words (on top of the many other trials we have with his care-gtube feedings, cochlear implant, endless equipment etc), but at least at the end, it should not alter his status as a man, and might mean 5'10" versus 6'6". He also is mobile with LOTS of support, but our PT's project that he will grow out of the tallest gait trainers (the device that he walks in) by 5'10". The list of limitations that he will face at 6'6" is VERY long, as he uses at least 8 seating/positioning/mobility devices every day that all have maximal supports (LOTS of straps and buckles). I can't help but wonder if you see this dilemma in the same light. We want him to maximize his potential and be able to go everywhere and do everything he wants...including college and everything beyond, and stunting his growth might be necessary to get there. Also as a side note, my family is very tall, as is my husbands, and while his growth was nearly stunted as a baby when he was starving as an infant by burning a ridiculous amount of calories with all of his movement and his limited ability to take in food by mouth, we got him a g-tube and made sure he got what he needed . (So many kids with CP do not get adequate nutrition...and thus their growth is stunted-which is why our dilemma is rare.)Miriam @ Rearranged Lifehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05369868235535230737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1556371561007953336.post-45387052892878269132009-09-06T21:10:37.960-07:002009-09-06T21:10:37.960-07:00While the "Ashley treatment" has so far ...While the "Ashley treatment" has so far been reserved for cognitively impaired children, there was an incident in Australia where a girl who had cerebral palsy, without any cognitive impairment, was given a hysterectomy in the early 1990s. This was without her consent and when she was interviewed, she was angry; she wanted to have periods as she regarded it as part of being a woman, even though she acknowledged that she might not be able to bear children. I <a href="http://www.blogistan.co.uk/blog/mt.php/2007/01/07/ashley_and_sterilising_the_severely_disabled" rel="nofollow">remarked</a> at the time that parents may make decisions imagining it to be in their child's best interests when it's really in their own (I'm speaking from personal experience here). An awful lot of the justification had to do with convenience, i.e. keeping her little and child-shaped so that she'd be easy to lift, etc.Matthew Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16675719484819810707noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1556371561007953336.post-12791194195696004752009-07-16T04:52:41.710-07:002009-07-16T04:52:41.710-07:00Lil, What amazes me is that doctors gloss over the...Lil, What amazes me is that doctors gloss over the fact only women are subjected to growth attenuation. It is mentioned briefly but it's significance or gender inequality is not subject to discussion. Sexual abuse of people with disabilities is not mentioned at all even though it was a consideration for Ashley. I agree this raises alarm bells and feminist theorists have not as yet strenuously objected to growth attenuation (it is not a core issue). If one took a strictly utilitarian position, rendering cognitively disabled males smaller provides a stronger argument.william Peacehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00223601480542461802noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1556371561007953336.post-74735101455504911582009-07-15T20:21:14.803-07:002009-07-15T20:21:14.803-07:00To date, growth attenuation is limited to treating...<i>To date, growth attenuation is limited to treating female children. </i><br /><br />This rings the biggest alarm bells for me. A grown woman could be "mistaken" for a sexual being - but rather than fighting sexual abuse of disabled people (which happens to both men and women, to both boys and girls) there's a retreat to a fantasy-land where no-one would sexually abuse a child? Or an adult, disabled man?lilacsigilhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08776762040144477840noreply@blogger.com