This 9-year old girl has a mental disability that leaves her with the mental ability of a 3-month old. She can't walk. She can't talk. She can't feed herself. Her parents decided to have her given hormones to limit her height and weight and had her uterus and breast buds removed. They said that they did this so she can have a better life. Her perpetual child-like size will definitely make it easier for them to care for her as she gets older. And without a uterus, no worries about menstruation or pregnancy should she get assaulted.
Their decision has caused a debate about the ethics of it. What i'm wondering is did they know before she was born that she would have this mental condition and if so, why did they carry the pregnancy to term? Not everybody likes the idea of abortion, but what kind of life is this girl having? Even if she wasn't given hormones and still had her uterus and breasts, what kind of life could she have? Is this better? Is this right?
But mebbe it's not something you can know ahead of time. And then her parents have to make the best of the situation. Gone are the days of Vikings where a weak child could be left outside and not have it considered inhumane, and murder besides. In a cold and practical light, how can they not make decisions that would make it easier for them to care for her? They seem to be committed to caring for her for the rest of their lives. Considering the health care system and what it takes for people to care for a disabled family member, can you really blame them for their decision?
The extent of my knowledge of this case is what i've read in a couple of articles that basically report the same thing. So if there's other info, i'd like to know. With just the info i have now, i'm not ready to condemn her parents on a breach of ethics.
By min | January 5, 2007, 3:32 PM | Ummm... Other?
Parents should be allowed to do whatever they want to their children, with the following two exceptions:
1) Sexual abuse
and #1's negotiable.
(that's just a joke.)