Health

Controversial Hormone Therapy Keeps ‘Permanently Unabled’ Individuals in Child-Like State

Ashley Therapy: Hormone Procedure Keeps Severely Disabled Small

Ashley (Photo: Pillow Angel)

Five years ago, the world was told about Ashley, a 9-year-old from Seattle who was given a treatment that would prematurely stop her growth, keeping her child size. Ashley was born with severe disabilities that would prevent her from walking and developing cognitively past the age of an infant. Her parents decided to allow doctors to give her hormones and perform other surgical procedures — eventually dubbed the “Ashley Treatment” – to improve her quality of life. When this treatment was published in a medical journal in 2007, it stirred ethical controversy.

Now, the Guardian reports that support and use of the hormone therapy is spreading. The Guardian states that it knows of at least 12 families who are in the process of carrying out this treatment with their disabled children and that more than 100 children already been treated in this manner.

Parents of these children with severe mental disabilities — children who are also deemed “permanently unabled” — believe limiting physical growth will improve their quality of life by avoiding pain they may have experienced otherwise. In a slide about Ashley’s treatment, “permanently unabled” is described as being at an “infant level mentally and physically, and will not improve.”

Ashley Therapy: Hormone Procedure Keeps Severely Disabled Small

(Photo: Pillow Angel)

The Guardian followed up with Ashley’s father about the now 14-year-old’s condition, ethical issues, others seeking the treatment and the criticism surrounding it.

During the email interview, AD — “Ashley’s Dad” — explains that the treatment given to Ashley sped her through puberty so she would stop growing at an earlier age and remain a smaller size. In the last five years, she has grown an inch, and AD writes that she is in stable health. Here’s how the Guardian explains the procedure:

For three years from the age of six, Ashley was administered high doses of the hormone estrogen to bring to a close her growth, effectively freeze-framing her body at the size of a child’s. She was also given a hysterectomy so that she would avoid menstruation, and had her nascent breast buds removed to escape the discomfort of fully grown breasts.

AD explained that since Ashley cannot walk, scoot or crawl, limiting her size has given her the “best quality of life for someone in her condition.” Because she is smaller, her caregivers can easily move her to prevent bedsores:

 We carry her or wheel her to keep her with us in the house, go on walks, get fresh air, and so on.

Ashley’s life may be very limited, but like any baby, novelty attracts her attention. We do all we can to provide her with experiences that seem to make her happy, give her a good life, and cheer her into expressing delight through vocalization and kicking.

Ashley Therapy: Hormone Procedure Keeps Severely Disabled Small

This slide describes Ashley's treatment and its outcomes. (Image: Pillow Angel)

AD states that as for Ashley’s mental capabilities, she remains very much in an infant-like state, but she can hold her head up, stick her thumb in her mouth and push her hair behind her ear. AD said these were “big milestones for her and very exciting developments for us.”

AD wrote to the Guardian that many hospitals and doctors will not provide the treatment because of its controversial nature. He notes that cases where treatment such as this would be considered acceptable are rare — “much less than 1 percent” of children with disabilities should qualify. He said Ashley’s treatment cost less than $40,000 and was covered by insurance.

The Guardian reports Curt Decker, director of the National Disability Rights Network, as saying he and his organization will be releasing a report in April petitioning Congress, states and other institutions to ban treatments such as this:

“This is a violation of the civil rights of individuals, and it should be prohibited,” Decker said. “Parents have rationalised that this is an OK thing to do, but it treats people as though they have no worth and that‘s a slippery slope that could end with the idea that people with disabilities don’t have to be kept alive or integrated in society.”

Silvia Yee, a lawyer with the Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund, agreed with this sentiment, saying it is “just one more choice on the menu of possibilities.” She asked, “Who has the right to decide to change an individual into a different entity?”

According to the Guardian, in 2007 the treatment performed on Ashley by the Washington children’s hospital was found unconstitutional and in violation of state law because it was done without a court order. The hospital agreed to not perform such a procedure without court permission in the future.

Still, AD said that of the contact he has received from outside parties on this issue, 95 percent has been positive. He said they have received more than 1,100 emails of support from parents and caregivers. Some who disagreed with the procedure before, he said, changed their mind when they visited his blog Pillow Angel – his nickname for Ashley — and saw pictures of her.

The Guardian has more from parents in support of this treatment. One is the mother of “Tom”, a now 12-year-old boy adopted from Vietnam who has been receiving attenuated therapy treatment since age 7 due to his severe cerebral palsy and epilepsy:

She rejects the argument that the therapy was a form of disrespect for her child: “It’s the opposite. It will help Tom a lot and I will be grateful for the rest of my life for what [Ashley's family] did.”

Tom’s mother said that she was unsure whether the hormone therapy he underwent to keep him small was granted any official approval. “Our doctor told me that there is still no official protocol; cases are assessed one by one.”

The mother of a Midwest girl, “Erica”, who was treated at age 10 also spoke with the Guardian:

Erica’s mother said: “People don’t understand we are talking about a small percentage – just one percent of the disabled population with disabilities like Erica’s – who would be candidates for this treatment … People think you are playing God or messing with nature. But our loving God wouldn’t want Erica to be in pain. She has a right to a happy life.”

Complete stories from these two families will be published in the Guardian tomorrow. Read more about AD’s perspective on why they decided to give Ashley this treatment and her condition here.

Comments (71)

1 2
  • Kerstile
    Posted on March 16, 2012 at 1:42am

    @ LWOOT. I give you a standing ovation. Your posts show love, compassion, faith and especially wisdom. Ignore the judging fools who have posted absolute garbage here. I stand with you. FWIW, prayers sent to you and your child.

    Report Post » Kerstile  
    • Chuck Stein
      Posted on March 16, 2012 at 2:53am

      Ditto

      Report Post »  
    • lwoot
      Posted on March 16, 2012 at 1:07pm

      @Dotado @Kerstile @Chuck Stein Thank you for your replies. Also thanks to others who want to think deeper about this beyond the emotional and/or clinical sides of this type of issue. Being a parent or care giver to a child with severe disabilities can be very isolating. Validation for the struggles and decisions you make generally only come from one source… the happiness and comfort that the one your caring for exhibits every day. I am compelled to read peoples reactions to this type of article. I am more than happy to comment and respond to the reactions because I have skin in this particular game. I am thankful for the forum to hopefully enlighten those that do not truly have the full picture of what families and people with severe mental disabilities lives are like. I believe that it is another one of those narratives media has controlled the national dialog and image. I wish to merely throw in a dose of truth to reality. I want to push you out of your comfort zone and dig deep for answers to hard questions. I know for me the one message that is the hardest to convey to those that think it’s needless suffering, as well as, those that feel badly for myself or my daughter that they would want to apologize for our struggles, is… LOVE. It all creates and builds a path to the bridge of understanding perfect love. The first step down that path is not to wrap ones self up in the darkness but search for and embrace light.To open up and recognize the profound.

      Report Post » lwoot  
  • CatholicConservative
    Posted on March 15, 2012 at 11:14pm

    I feel there is a disconnect here. The treatment(s) are done to “improve her quality of life by avoiding pain, yet many of the “benefits” being offered here are about how much easier it is for the care-givers and parents. Cases that are acceptable for treatment are 1% now, but I sense a slippery slope here. What other conditions will soon qualify? How does this mesh with the previous report about children who feel they were born in the wrong body and want to be a different sex? If all it takes is a court order to perform controversial procedures, what else will the all-knowing, all-caring government allow? Sorry, but I don’t like it. God put that child on this planet with those parents for a reason, just like everybody else is here for a reason. I support science that cures and heals, but this seems to be about convenience.

    Report Post » CatholicConservative  
    • pamela kay
      Posted on March 15, 2012 at 11:36pm

      CATHOLICCONSERVATIVE; I agree. Where does it go from here? Where does it stop? It makes me uncomfortable and though I understand how it would be easier for the parents to keep the child small it seems to go against nature and life itself.

      Report Post » pamela kay  
    • lwoot
      Posted on March 16, 2012 at 12:09am

      I don’t recall this being a government mandated issue to begin with. I believe this was a treatment talked about between the parents and the their child’s Doctors regarding what was best for their child. Maybe I missed the part of government being involved. I will definitely reread to be sure.
      I can understand the idea that when talking about care that it comes across as convenience for care-givers or parents. But it isn’t simply that. Being a care giver parent of a severely disabled child I can guarantee even with this treatment there is still no such thing as ease of care.It elevates certain parts of care that will eventually impact their child as they grow into adulthood physically. I fear greatly that their could ever come a day that I would not be able to care for my daughter. I fear what it would mean for her to no longer be in a loving caring home with family that make her needs and happiness paramount. She isn’t just a job for me. There is far more involved in why one would choose this treatment than ease of care.

      Report Post » lwoot  
    • lwoot
      Posted on March 16, 2012 at 12:16am

      Ok so the part about government getting involved is to have legislation passed to stop Parents and Doctors from providing this treatment. “According to the Guardian, in 2007 the treatment performed on Ashley by the Washington children’s hospital was found unconstitutional and in violation of state law because it was done without a court order. “

      Report Post » lwoot  
    • lwoot
      Posted on March 16, 2012 at 12:29am

      Decker said. “Parents have rationalized that this is an OK thing to do, but it treats people as though they have no worth and that‘s a slippery slope that could end with the idea that people with disabilities don’t have to be kept alive or integrated in society.”
      First of all this idea of the blanket definition of a disabled person really gets to me. My daughter is severely mentally disabled. She isn’t just missing a leg or a hand or something. She smears her poo on the walls! She could care less if she is integrated into any society! She doesn’t care what society even thinks of her. She can’t stand to be around large groups of people. What comforts and makes her happy isn’t the same as someone who has a physical disability. She has no concept of discrimination. She simply seeks a day to day life where she feels loved, safe and comfortable. Nothing about this even walks near the edge of a slope that says don’t keep them alive.

      Report Post » lwoot  
  • Virginia Rebel
    Posted on March 15, 2012 at 10:20pm

    I have watched an elderly family member struggle to care for a now nearly 50-year-old fully adult sized “child” like this who cannot walk unassisted, who has never had any use whatsoever for her uterus or breasts, who cannot talk, who behaves in every way like an 18-month-old toddler. I think that these procedures would have made both the child and her parents much happier and healthier. Before any governmental official or court assumes the right to tell parents and their doctors what they can and cannot do with a child like this, they should spend at least a week as the sole caretakers of such a person. It think it would really effect their perspective.

    Report Post »  
  • TJexcite
    Posted on March 15, 2012 at 9:43pm

    Interesting juxtaposition. Some would do what every they can do to make a child that special happy and free of pain and some would have no problem just killing them to free their pain and any drain on society.

    Report Post » TJexcite  
  • Chet Hempstead
    Posted on March 15, 2012 at 9:42pm

    Someone like this who will never be able to walk or develop mentally beyond the level of an infant, I don’t see anything wrong with just killing them. I’d do it for a dog that couldn’t walk, so why wouldn’t I do it for a person who isn’t even as smart as a dog?

    Report Post »  
    • lwoot
      Posted on March 15, 2012 at 9:46pm

      Won’t even waste the words to try and make the point. You wouldn’t get the point.

      Report Post » lwoot  
    • Misha
      Posted on March 15, 2012 at 9:50pm

      You are kidding, right?

      Report Post »  
    • Gamaliel
      Posted on March 16, 2012 at 1:05am

      You haven’t developed intellectually or ethically much beyond a dog either. The same could be said for you!

      Report Post »  
  • girlnurse
    Posted on March 15, 2012 at 8:38pm

    Its not my place to judge a parent in this situation who is doing the best they can for their child and my heart goes out to them, I know it is difficult-but I have seen some disturbing trends lately. I am also an RN. My daughter is 7 and started going thru early puberty (breast buds) the doctors said she would probably have a period in third grade and they wanted to give her hormones to prevent this from happening (a shot every few weeks)!! He** to the no! I say it is a very scary trend to see doctors start playing God with these hormones…when its probably the hormones in meats, etc. that are causing these things in the first place! Im sure this generation will have more cancers than any other…..scary..Its the slippery slope that I am concerned about..

    Report Post » girlnurse  
    • Misha
      Posted on March 15, 2012 at 9:49pm

      My niece hit puberty in the 4th grade, well ahead of her peers. It was awful, and if her mom had known of the option of delaying it, she would have in a heartbeat. Her growth was “stunted” and she’s only 4 ft 8 – plus the entire being different than everyone else with the emotions and acne and wearing a bra was awful. Teasing, etc. This is a rare instance when I’d advocate for interference (by you) to delay the onset of puberty for your daughter. It’s really too young to deal with.

      Report Post »  
    • blackburry
      Posted on March 16, 2012 at 10:01am

      so where do you draw the line? my daughter developed CPP (central precocious puberty) right when she turned 3 years old. breast development, hair where a 3yo shouldn’t have it, hormonal mood swings, accelerated growth, and menstruation on the horizon (probably when she was nearing 6 years old).

      we have her on suppression therapy so that she can lead a normal life. her growth won’t go too fast and peter out leaving her short. she won’t have to menstruate in first grade. she will have a normal childhood.

      so tell me where you draw the line at medical intervention when it’s available?

      ps, can’t blame it on meats and dairy. we‘re vegan and we don’t eat soy products.

      Report Post » blackburry  
  • thekuligs
    Posted on March 15, 2012 at 8:16pm

    On a personal level, I wouldn’t mess with what God has done. But I try not to judge families who are only doing what they believe is best for their child.

    Report Post » thekuligs  
  • Jenny Lind
    Posted on March 15, 2012 at 7:47pm

    I think these parents are wonderfull. They will not be here forever, if this child lives either a sibling or the state will take care of them. A happy baby type child with smiles is a blessing for family to care for, and size does count. I cared for my completely helpless mother for 16 months, and I was blessed to be able to do it. I was still in my forties then, now it would be really difficult. They have made the best of a horrible situation. God bless them, I hope the light of reason let’s other parents make the choice.

    Report Post »  
    • TomFerrari
      Posted on March 15, 2012 at 8:20pm

      I think they, and you, are DISGUSTING!
      They are “deemed” “permanently” unabled.
      By whom? By man. Man is imperfect. Man makes mistakes, and man cannot know the future.
      How about the child’s rights? How about eleven years from now when a cure is found or a treatment is found, and you’ve CHOSEN to permanently mutilate your own child?!?!

      My sympathy is for the child. The parents role is to nurture and care for the child, not to deny it the opportunity to grow, the opportunity to fail, the opportunity to succeed, or the opportunity to experience pain. Why don’t we just put all our children on this “SOMA” and lock them away all safe and secure. That way, they will never get hurt; they will never get their heart broken; and they will never fail.

      UN BE LEIVABLE!

      Reminds me of the woman on NPR announcing she would suffocate her own child.
      DISGUSTING.

      Report Post » TomFerrari  
    • babylonvi
      Posted on March 15, 2012 at 8:58pm

      Tom-a-Rino, you obviously have not been and worked around severely disables mentally challenged people. I would not judge these people unless you have ‘been there and done that’. Likely these folke would have had to put this special needs person in a ‘Medicaid Nursing Home’ as they aged and she became larger, more difficult to handle and aggressive. How many Medicaid Nursing Homes have YOU been in. Likely as not she would have s shortened painful unhappy existence. Just the powers above that YOU don;t have to make such a choice.

      Report Post » babylonvi  
    • lwoot
      Posted on March 15, 2012 at 9:30pm

      Tom I agree the term they want to use is more than offensive. I agree we never know what the future holds in terms of medical advances in terms of cures. I know that I believe in the right to life and individual freedom. I know that we have a responsibility to care for and protect those rights for those who can’t protect them themselves. I know I have had to make those choices for my own daughter. I know I am the sole person who makes her wants and needs possible. I know that just because she is 20 and a free citizen that she just can’t walk out the front door and have stroll down the street. I am responsible for protecting her when she can’t protect herself. I fought for a surgery for her for 6 years that the Doctors didn’t want to do. I fought for it so she wouldn’t spend her life in pain. She didn’t fit the protocol for typical candidates for the surgery. But I watched her suffer every day till she was 13 years old. So I mutilated my daughter to stop her suffering and she had no say in it because she can’t speak. I spoke for her. I screamed for her and I fought for her.

      Report Post » lwoot  
    • Bikkiboo
      Posted on March 15, 2012 at 9:44pm

      This sounds like a wonderful idea. I have worked with severely disabled children who can do nothing for themselves. It is nearly impossible to care for them when they grow large. This would mean a child could be kept in a loving family enjoying its surroundings as much as is possible. It would also save taxpayer money as these children usually end up on Medicaid with visiting helpers or else in a special care facility. If they stay small, most parents can continue to provide daily care for a long time. They also wouldn’t need a lot of special equipment at home or to take the child out when they go out. Grown children like this rarely get to leave home because it is so hard. That means their care givers don’t get to live a relatively normal life either.
      People who complain about this kind of treatment should go volunteer for respite care giving for one of these grown children. I bet they’d change their minds quickly.

      Report Post » Bikkiboo  
  • COFemale
    Posted on March 15, 2012 at 7:25pm

    My ex in-laws had a severe mentally disabled child since the age of 4 days old. As Tammy got older and they got older, they were not able to lift her and eventually had to put her in a home. They are both deceased now, but I was there when they had to move Tammy from the wheel chair to a bed even when she was around 12 years old. She is probably in her 30′s now. She probably would have benefited from something like this.

    As weird as this sounds, having the ability to move a disable child with ease, it much better than having to send them away to a home. The parents will have a longer time to care for their child. I think this would be the best for all around.

    Report Post » COFemale  
  • The Gooch
    Posted on March 15, 2012 at 7:14pm

    As someone who works closely with these folks and their family, I understand it is not my place to judge. Prodiving the care and love to a profoundly or severerly MR/developmentally disabled child is a full time job. I’m always blown away by the parents of the most limited amongst us who want as little govt. help as possible while parents with much higher functioning children start (and even demand) a cottage industry (at taxpayer expense) around their children. The best families see Mom and Dad working with friends and family serving as care providers. Sometimes, humanity can rise above itself.
    Watching your child go through puberty and seeing it kill him or her is not easy… and not necessarily humane. Is the procedure in this article “right” or “good”? Quality of life should matter. There is no easy “yes” or “no” answer to this dilemma. God bless the parents who love and fight for their children. To hell with the monsters who see this beings as throw aways. I‘d give my last dollar to aid them before I’d p!ss on your smoldering corpse.

    Report Post »  
    • lwoot
      Posted on March 15, 2012 at 7:33pm

      The Gooch Your very right about God blessing those fighting for their kids. I know especially with Doctors what it is like to fight tooth and nail with others to do what I think is best for my daughter. Not for me or the system or the protocol of some Doctor or Hospital. But for my daughters individual needs and happiness. I know her better than anyone and yet trying to get the so called experts to listen feels like screaming in a forest. It’s the same shut up and sit down we know whats best that I see in so many other venues of our lives. I feel the most for those that don’t question with boldness and any of those who end up suffering for it.

      Report Post » lwoot  
    • wvernon1981
      Posted on March 15, 2012 at 8:40pm

      God bless them? God cursed them with disabled children. Thank science, the engineers, doctors, and others that we have means of dealing with disabled children our ancestors couldn’t have dreamed of.

      Report Post »  
    • lwoot
      Posted on March 15, 2012 at 9:12pm

      wvernon1981 He cursed them?! That is exactly the statement that shows the greatest difference between those that abort children that are disabled and those those that keep and care for children that are disabled. Yes a blessing!! One that God gave me. A daughter that he blessed me with. I never thought of her as a curse! I was humbled that the Lord chose me to be her Mother. That he had the faith in me to be the Mother to her that she needed me to be. I prayed for the strength and wisdom to live up to that, what he knew was within me, for her. I have learned more about life and love and strength from her than anyone in my life. Her trials and tribulations with the most simple things that I would have taken for granted and never seen the value in was the most precious gift. It made me a better Mother to my other children. God is the one that gave us the ability to reason and learn to even use science to do anything to help them where we can. Leaving God out of it when we ask these questions about science and how we use it is the greatest arrogance.

      Report Post » lwoot  
    • The Gooch
      Posted on March 16, 2012 at 10:39am

      wvernon1981
      I would still rather devote time, money and general resources to those, who through no fault of their own, were dealt a raw hand at birth with a developmental disability than p!ss away money on those with an entitlement mentality engendered by nefarious enablers. I find it much nobler and rewarding to support those, who through no fault of their own, can’t support themselves. I see no honor in hand outs to the bums who impose their own disability upon themselves (junkies, fatties and plain opportunuist), choose to check out and just decide they don’t want to work. Which population do you believe puts a greater strain on the economy and society in general?
      You hint at being able to discover and discard the disabled. I boldly assert I will step over any bum in the street who asserts he or she is too good, too fat, too drunk, too stoned…. too whatever… to work. I don’t need the wonders technology and modern medicince to see the vast array of mewling parasites who choose to check out. And I have just as little patience for their enablers.

      Report Post »  
    • The Gooch
      Posted on March 16, 2012 at 10:48am

      Stories like this reveal how many folks truly see the least amongst: As competition taking away from the complainer’s “fair share”. Well, brothers and sisters, you ain’t gonna be waddling around with a sound mind forever. Whatever limits you wish on those who need total care, you damn well better be ready to accept for yourself. Feel free to teach those coming after to think about only themselves and to shun the disabled. Your golden years should be a hoot.
      But YOU’LL do the right thing, of course. Hmm, what might that be? Seems to me greed in (or for) life almost translates to a profound fear of death.

      Report Post »  
  • Elena2010
    Posted on March 15, 2012 at 7:08pm

    He said…“but it treats people as though they have no worth” and I bet he advocates for aborting children who have severe difficulties, too!

    This keeps Ashley at home w/her parents who obviously love her and give her as much mental stimulation as possible. She is not warehoused or abused.

    It seems to be the best option available since medical science can help bring these children to term and keep them healthy and alive. In previous generations, folks who were profoundly disabled did not live long.

    Report Post » Elena2010  
    • deeberj
      Posted on March 16, 2012 at 9:14am

      WVernon – you said, “God bless them? God cursed them with disabled children.”

      God does not curse people with disabled children. Things happen and children are born disabled. It is not God who does this. It is our fallen world that causes these things to happen.

      Report Post » deeberj  
  • lwoot
    Posted on March 15, 2012 at 6:25pm

    I am sure I will struggle with writing this and trying to express my thoughts and feelings properly. My oldest daughter Amanda was born with a rare genetic disorder called Cornelia de Lange Syndrome. She is considered severely disabled. She is 20 yrs. old and I am her primary caregiver. I am 42 and feel far older some days. My daughter is mobile, she walks and runs. She does not speak but is vocal and uses sign language primarily to communicate. She has autistic tendencies. Part of her syndrome makes her small in stature. She is about 4 foot 3 inches and weighs about 75-80 lbs. She is extremely strong and has a high pain thresh hold. She has self mutilative behaviors, can be aggressive toward others and is very destructive to things in her environment. She has severe mental retardation. Puberty was severely delayed and drawn out for her due to her syndrome. I don’t know if this type of treatment would have had any benefit to my daughter. She is not as severely impaired cognitively as the children described. But I can completely understand the desire of these parents to seek the treatment with a long term plan to care for their children. My daughter was in a residential type group home for 2 yrs. and it was a huge mistake and I pray she will never be without me to have to be placed ever again. Her sisters and I have talked and planned for them to take over her care if anything were to happen to me. I can say I am so thankful of her small stature.

    Report Post » lwoot  
    • lwoot
      Posted on March 15, 2012 at 6:41pm

      I know exactly how hard she would be to care for is she wasn’t. I have met some adults with her syndrome who weren’t effected with small stature. I don’t know if I could care for her if she were bigger or anyone else for that matter. She would have to be drugged for certain for her and others safety. As of now she is on no medications. She has good and bad days. What one person may think is a happy wonderful life picture in their mind on how her day should be for her to have is different from what she would want. That I can guarantee. I went through this with the schools. Trying to make her fit their mold of what they think she would want made her more agitated and self mutilative. She spends her day today life in the way that comforts her the most. It doesn’t fit my ideal in my mind and it took me a little while for that to sink into my head. I may think it‘s sunny and beautiful out and wouldn’t she love to be outside and what lovely picture in my mind. Her and I outside playing. But she doesn’t and making her would end up with her flipping out ripping her earlobes open, blood pouring, head banging, body throwing melt down. So what ever my natural course may be isn’t the same as what her is for her happiness. I thank God that he let me understand this about my little angel. It helped me to understand it in my other children.

      Report Post » lwoot  
    • Dotado
      Posted on March 15, 2012 at 7:02pm

      LWOOT, what you are saying makes perfect sense. God Bless You for having the strength that you do. He has opened your eyes, no doubt in my mind. Again, God bless you.

      Report Post » Dotado  
  • Michaelshock
    Posted on March 15, 2012 at 6:21pm

    This is a sad story, but if this is a treatment used to comfort and alleviate pain for these children, it is humane and just. From the article it looks like what medicine is supposed to do. You can’t just scream “stop playing God”. This is not Eugenics. Eugenics is evil. I am a “Shockley”, that doesn’t make me an expert, but this is not Eugenics. This is care for extreme cases. Let’s not turn it into a bat **** crazy debate. Pray for those kids and their families.

    Report Post »  
    • Elena2010
      Posted on March 15, 2012 at 7:12pm

      Quite right. Eugenics would have killed her shortly after her disability was discovered. That’s the purpose of eugenics – breed only the fittest. We do that w/farm animals. On the human side, the Nazis and Spartans practiced it. None of us want to be either.

      Report Post » Elena2010  
  • marcus_arealius
    Posted on March 15, 2012 at 6:20pm

    To add to my previous wise crack – In no way am I making fun of these unfortunate children. My heart goes out to any person with developmental problems. I find it extremely tempting to not take every jab at BHO particularly with his outrageous stand on late term abortion. If it were up to him these children would not have the chance at life.. I do find this procedure/treatment a bit odd tho. It’s not clear that medical science can accurately predict the future of any apparent mental disability. There are many cases which contradict predictions.

    Report Post »  
  • kindling
    Posted on March 15, 2012 at 6:15pm

    If I did not have contact in my daily life with a child like this I might also stand on the side of the line that believes this is over the line. But I do have a child like this and I have a lot of contact with parents of children like this. I can tell you from my perspective that this is a good thing. If something makes the child and families life easier and more enjoyable what difference should it make to people that don’t share in those lives?

    Report Post » kindling  
  • blaize
    Posted on March 15, 2012 at 6:12pm

    If it allows her to stay at home and live in a loving enviroment….for the short time she will probably have. My sister’s son was becoming too big for her to take care of at age 7. He would have had to been placed in a nursing home (had he lived past his
    pneumonias). What about cancers that may arise form to excessive hormones given. Doesn’t excessive estrogen promote breast cancer? That may not be an issue……most of these “kids” die prematurely from respiratory illness / pneumonia.

    Report Post »  
    • Elena2010
      Posted on March 15, 2012 at 7:14pm

      Breasts were removed, per the story.

      Report Post » Elena2010  
    • lwoot
      Posted on March 15, 2012 at 7:52pm

      It says breast bud removal, which is a small gland that would grow with puberty. Is only done pre-puberty.

      Report Post » lwoot  
  • marcus_arealius
    Posted on March 15, 2012 at 6:10pm

    That’s it!! The explanation after all this time! Barry has been the subject of an Alinsky Hormone therapy. It keeps the brain from developing while promoting extreme growth in the ego region.

    Report Post »  
  • HumbleCitizen
    Posted on March 15, 2012 at 6:10pm

    In John Holdren and Obama’s world, these children would never exist because post-birth abortion will nip these issues in the bud before the non-person infant grows into personhood.
    **gag

    Report Post » HumbleCitizen  
  • SpeckledPup
    Posted on March 15, 2012 at 6:08pm

    will not be long now: obama will declare these Disabled the “USELESS EATERS” in his T4 Program, and he will have the democrats clamoring for the Disableds’ obama-euthanasia deaths to ”save the nation”.

    Report Post »  
  • youdidthis
    Posted on March 15, 2012 at 6:07pm

    is great if is used to help…

    what if the people who get this , do not want to help …

    instead use it on populations…eugenics ring a dam bell.
    or a permanent child sex slave…?

    could be good, could be really,really dam bad.

    Report Post »  
  • Chuck Stein
    Posted on March 15, 2012 at 5:53pm

    “Who has the right to decide to change an individual into a different entity?” — hmmm. maybe you can ask that question again. Next time, pose the question to “doctors” who perform “sex change” operations.

    Report Post »  
    • 2theADDLED
      Posted on March 15, 2012 at 7:58pm

      I agree what if the child is in severe pain but could not speak they would be forced to live in pain the rest of their lives in silence. The decision should be made by the individual and not some doctor or scientist or other individual. You may think it is best but what you think may be the worst.

      Report Post »  
    • Chet Hempstead
      Posted on March 15, 2012 at 9:38pm

      Doctors who perform sex change operations don’t decide to change an individual into a different entity. That decision is made by the individuals themselves. I do not believe that any doctor would perform a sex change on a mentally incompetent person at the request of a third party.

      Report Post »  
  • LouC57
    Posted on March 15, 2012 at 5:46pm

    I’m on the fence here. It’s horrible, truly. On the other hand, from a caregiver standpoint, it’s a plus. As the caregivers age, weight becomes more of a problem, changing diapers on a baby’s difficult, on a disabled adult it’s extremely difficult. Been there, done that for 15 years.

    Report Post »  
  • welovetheUSA
    Posted on March 15, 2012 at 5:35pm

    I think this is Fine……I have seen many adults with these disibilties and they are abused and neglected..many are sexually abused on a regular basis………they recieve substandard care and are Never loves by care takers.

    Report Post » welovetheUSA  
  • ChildofJesus
    Posted on March 15, 2012 at 5:33pm

    Ohh God, if I could cry right now I would! What have we become? :’(

    Report Post »  
    • welovetheUSA
      Posted on March 15, 2012 at 5:37pm

      Go to a home where these children are put and become adults…..you will faint for the way they are cared for…………no matter what you think about this childs treatment……..she is cared for and lives a life with her family and is Loved.

      Report Post » welovetheUSA  
    • youdidthis
      Posted on March 15, 2012 at 6:08pm

      you can go to an old age home and see the dam same thing.
      same abuse…

      Report Post »  
    • ChildofJesus
      Posted on March 15, 2012 at 6:11pm

      I have seen it guys but it’s never easy to read, see or hear about it. they’re human beings and being treated like this dare i say worse then animals is heartbreaking.

      Report Post »  
    • portague
      Posted on March 15, 2012 at 6:17pm

      “Go to a home where these children are put and become adults…..you will faint for the way they are cared for” The treatment does not change that at all those places will still exist. If the family truely loves thier child they will take of them regardless. The treatment just makes it so they end up in a home later rather then sooner. Reason being keeping them in a child like state allow the parents to take care of them for a longer time because the older the parents get the harder it is for them to take care of someone with needs and themseves. It could be the parents realize this and want to take care of thier child themselves as long as possible because they love thier child and want to avoid sending them to home if possible. The problem is if the child out lives them they still end up in a home but they had a better life for longer period of time.

      Report Post »  
    • kindling
      Posted on March 15, 2012 at 6:21pm

      I stress over thinking about where my son is going to end up when he is too big for me to care for anymore. How can it be better for him to go be “cared for” by people that could care less, it is just a job? If he were to stay small he would be treated better where ever he goes. He would be easier to care for and be able to stay in the family that loves him byone reason. I will say it again, if you don’t have a child like this you have no idea.

      Report Post » kindling  
  • welovetheUSA
    Posted on March 15, 2012 at 5:32pm

    I think this is fine………I have see adults with these disibilties and they are for the most past abused and neglected in homes and taken care of by people who could never provide them with care let alone love.

    Report Post » welovetheUSA  
    • teamarcheson
      Posted on March 15, 2012 at 5:55pm

      If its so fine, then why is kept a secret from us. This is nothing more than people playing God.

      Report Post »  
    • The Gooch
      Posted on March 15, 2012 at 7:24pm

      To teamarcheson:
      How is attempting to provide for a higher quality of life equitable to playing God? Wouldn‘t improving the quality of a being’s life be the ultimate aim of medicine and society in general? Playing God… I believe that is more in the realm of deciding who lives and who dies.
      Organ harvesting is more ethically questionable than this procedure. You’re talking about ~ 2.5 % of the ENTIRE MR population… which is about 2.5 % of the general population.
      If this is “playing God”, then surely abortion is “playing Satan.”
      Whatever…. The ignorance on this issue is astounding. Most people want these folks out of sight… and out of mind. Would that ease your conscience?

      Report Post »  
    • The Gooch
      Posted on March 15, 2012 at 7:30pm

      I believe many people are assuming this procedure affects the child both physically and mentally. My understanding is the procedure in question is to limit physical growth. Sadly, the mental capacity of the child is likely as developed as it is ever going to be at < 3 years. This isn't some weird chemical lobotomy or further brain damage. It is, oddly enough, making the body match the mind. I find this certainly worthy of debate… but hardly immoral.

      Report Post »  
    • lwoot
      Posted on March 15, 2012 at 7:48pm

      The other thing I would like to point out is something that really doesn’t get addressed in these types of debates regarding anyone playing God. My Mother is a Neonatal Nurse. Has been one for 30 years roughly. Some of the things in University Hospitals that they do to keep preemies alive and not giving parents full disclosure for informed consent as to how it effects their child is very disturbing to me. I know the number of child from one such hospital, that are so severely disabled this is the type of treatment their parents could some day seek, is quite staggering.

      Report Post » lwoot  
1 2

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love