The Ashley Treatment
 

I'm not sure if this would go here - or if it would go in philosophy because it falls under the ethics umbrella - but it is 'health' related, so here it is.

The Fox News Article: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,241279,00.html

The Family's Website: http://ashleytreatment.spaces.live.com/

I'm still reading and researching and trying to figure out how I feel about all of what is going on here - but I'm leaning into the 'against' column pretty heavily.

Opinions?

It's a very interesting case. I'm not sure how I feel. At first thought, it's pretty damn freaky. I'm generally opposed to medically unnecessary operations and treatments.

But medically unnecessary operations happen all the time. The parents are just changing the kid's outside to match the inside. It's a lot like a sex change operation that way.

The part that bugs me is that the parents are making this decision for the child. But when I examine that, it falls away too. Parents should be able to make decisions regarding their children's health.

Emotionally, I don't like it, but when I think about it, I can't tell you what is wrong with it.

That's pretty much how I'm feeling - with the niggling 'isn't this the top to a really slippery slope' type of argument building.

Yes, this child has numerous medical issues where these procedures may help her - but what do the high doses of estrogen do? What does the removal of natural hormones do?

What doors would this open to sterilize those people who may have brain injuries or defects, but aren't as far along as she is?

There's a lot to think about here - unfortunately not all of the answers are pretty.

I am at a loss for what to think. I can understand why her parents did this. At first I was appalled to read that they sterilized her and forced her to remain a child. But then I read of her condition, and I can't say for sure whether or not I would do the same given the situation. I will have to chew this one over for a while before I can say more though.

Yeesh.

I'd be all for surgical sterilization of a profoundly incapacitated child at an appropriate age, if that's what the parents felt was best. But all the rest of the stuff that goes beyond sterilization... it's just creepy. And while they are (perhaps understandably) trying to avoid a particular set of problems here, I can't help but think that they're just trading them in for a different set of problems (medical and otherwise) that they just can't imagine now.

Given the other medical issues, I think that euthenizing her would have been a better option. It would appear that she lacks even a minimal ability to interact with her environment. I certainly feel for her parents, but this heads straight for downright creepy.

The surgical interventions have pretty far reaching implications. Until I got to the bit about her having static encephalopathy, I was thinking towards how convenient it might be for a pedophile, for example, to have access to an child-scale adult. This is scary stuff.

I agree. But it's not an option that's available.

"Available" is a malleable term.

I don't think that was accidental. The article was written with maximum shock value, right up front,

...

and then,

...

after a brief message from our sponsors,

...

have you seen the pictures? link here:

...

oh,

...

and by the way,

...

the rest of the story.

This case is interesting, and disturbing ... I can see the rationale for keeping a permanently bedridden patient as small as possible. However, the other aspects of the surgery and treatment are disturbing primarily because the parents, on their web site, describe the need in terms of avoiding potential problems and then we read that virtually all the anticipated problems are either questionable, treatable, or won't come up.

For example, the fact that large breasts run in the family doesn't mean it's a slam-dunk that this child will have them; ditto for fibrocystic disease and breast cancer. If a real problem developed, it could be remedied with surgery no more extensive than what they've subjected her to already. If she gets painful menses (not something that happens with all women), pain meds are available, just as they are for all women. All babies get teething pain, and most get an ear infection or several, but we don't yank their teeth or tube their ears automatically to avoid it; we treat the pain. Potential future sexual abuse seems a reasonable concern until we read that she has never been cared for and will never be cared for by anyone but her family. And even her potential adult size, the most compelling consideration, wouldn't make her parents institutionalize her - they say that even if she weighed 300 lb they would still care for her at home.

I guess the disturbing aspects of their web site, for me, are: one, that her parents seem quite focused on promoting this 'treatment' and making other parents of disabled children aware of it; they don't present this as one isolated case with an individual solution. Two, she's a cute kid and there's a creepy tone to her parents' writing in their references to her 'pure, angelic spirit', wanting her in the same room to be near her 'positive energy', and to seeing her as their 'pillow angel' - they seem to be getting secondary benefit from her current appearance that they likely wouldn't get were she to continue growing into adulthood. If that's the chief reason for the surgery/treatment, then it wasn't about her health or safety, nor her future care. They seem to project certain attributes and qualities on to their 'pillow angel' that make them feel warm and fuzzy, but which realistically are their feelings, not hers. Not that that's a problem of itself, but wanting to keep her appearance in line with the 'pillow angel' concept is ... creepy. Somewhere in there, she has a soul and she is an individual, even if she can't communicate or learn.

Her parents will almost certainly die before she does, so she will be in someone else's care someday.

I don't have a problem with this treatment. It's shocking at first--especially when the stupid article doesn't mention the fact that she's severely disabled until halfway down the page--but the fact is this girl will never lead a normal life, and improving the ease of her care almost by definition improves her quality of life.

After reading the parents website I agree with what they did. I have cared for those who could not care for themselves, and if they had been that way their entire life then this would be really helpful to them and their caretakers.
If I didn't want to have kids I would most likely want a hysterectomy myself to avoid my menses. (Not that you wanted to know that... ) It is way more trouble then it is worth, at least it is to me.

The girl has the mentality of an infant, and I think it would be very disturbing for her to have yearly "well woman" check ups since she doesn't understand. And if she doesn't need the breasts then why wait for a problem? It is much more difficult to remove fully developed breasts then the breast buds (about the size of an almond) they removed.

There is much potential for the "Ashley Treatment" to be abused but I think it is acceptable in this case. Just my two cents.

And it was shocking to read about it at first, but that is only because I knew nothing of the situation.

At this point we do not know what is "permanent", what therapies, cures or medical advancements will be available in the next thirty or-so years.
To remove so many options from this young girl, who they do not KNOW how far she will mentally develop or what will absolutely be in her future, for their convenience, and that is all, is just sick.

I'm pretty sure my aunt wishes she could 'sterilize' her son sometimes. He's physically and intellectually handicapped, but if there's one thing in the world he's good at, it's whacking off. I think he's ruining her carpet mostly.

It's always easiest to look at these types of things from the outside and judge, but being on the inside is almost impossible.

Maybe they should have euthenased her, but then, maybe rkz is right. Maybe one day she'll improve intellectually if nothing else. Maybe she wont though.

It's a pretty sad story. and yeah, a bit creepy too, but I'm sure the parents must have thought very long and hard about what they planned to do.

Being on the other end of that discussion gives one pause...
Try being the one people are thinking of "putting into a home for your own good" or something similar... really think on it, then talk to me about this.

The only thing I can relate to that is when my mum was dying and the palliative care group wanted to put her in Mr Ollivet which is the hospital everyone here goes to when they're beyond hope. I know my Mum said if we had to we should do it, but she was pretty clear about wanting to die at home. That's what happened in the end, and I'm glad she didn't have to leave her home before the end.

I hope you can find a way to stay in your home rkz. It's important.

The issue is over, at least until I start to die in earnest.
It was mostly about my father being "unable" to see my in this condition.
I am of two minds about it, I try to be compassionate and understand, sometimes it is very hard to be.

It's an emotional problem for your father? He'd rather not see you at all than see you in pain? (just guessing). Does he live with you?

That is all I can think of.
Across the street, he helps take care of my son sometimes.
He was supposed to help with me, but he does not.

You know, as sexist as it may sound, sometimes men just can't deal with such emotional issues. Then again, some women can't either. Maybe he just needs to know that it's ok if his heart is breaking and that no one blames him? Or maybe someone needs to kick him up the arse and remind him that he still has a son and needs to step up when he's needed most instead of wallowing in his own self pity?

In a lot of ways my mother is equally as bad and my wife's mother has been also.
This has been hard on everyone, my wife is the only one who has consistently tried to be above the disease, and it has gotten to her as well. But, she never tried to give-up.
He and I have always had issues... but there has always been love there and trust. Not so with my Mom.
He at least admitted it was a mistake, he did do that.
It still freaks me out though.

It's a hard road, but I think your parents especially should really try and see that it's you that has to live with it not them. Although it affects them profoundly, their lives are still in tact and they still have their health (I assume?). They need to remember how they cared for you the last time you were helpless...and realise that they still have the capicty to be there for you.

Some days they can, some not...
Honestly, I would just be happy with someone sitting and watching a movie with me.
I don't need to be reminded about how much someone has done for me... but that is a WHOLE OTHER discussion.

At what age? Looking at those photos she looked pretty happy at the various stages. We have no idea what her quality of life is.

Yeah... I chose not to address that one at all.