Originally posted by ivanhoeBest interests refer to optimizing her quality of life. Given that she will derive no benefit
Please reread what I wrote: "Because I am not convinced that the "Ashley Treatment" is in Ashley's best interests. They should describe first what they mean by "best interests". "
whatsoever from having breasts or a uterus and she will derive discomfort from them, and
given that her parents will be her guardians for as long as they (or she) is alive, they have
a duty to safeguard that.
In order to demonstrate that these surgeries are not in her best interests, you would have
to show that either 1) she will derive benefit from having breasts or a uterus; 2) she would
not derive discomfort from them.
I'll wager that you won't give it a shot.
Nemesio
Originally posted by NemesioI'll buy into that wager. That is, unless the RCC has specifically written an analysis of this problem that Hoe can CnP. We all know he's too stupid to write anything original.
Best interests refer to optimizing her quality of life. Given that she will derive no benefit
whatsoever from having breasts or a uterus and she will derive discomfort from them, and
given that her parents will be her guardians for as long as they (or she) is alive, they have
a duty to safeguard that.
In order to demonstrate that these surgeries are n ...[text shortened]... ould
not derive discomfort from them.
I'll wager that you won't give it a shot.
Nemesio
Originally posted by ivanhoeThey did provide an explanation. Read the article. Read remora's and my posts.
Since when does the burden of proof rest on my shoulders ? The burden of proof rests on the shoulders of those implementing this "Ashley treatment".
This is another one of those 'I'm Ivanhoe, and I have an opinion, but I'm not sharing' games,
isn't it.
You really are worthy of pity.
Nemesio
Originally posted by NemesioThe idea of a "mental age" is quite controversial, and I think even professionals who use this concept would agree that an adult with a mental age of three months is not exactly like a three months old baby except for the body. Even if her cognitive abilities may be comparable to a three months old baby, all the years she has lived almost certainly will leave a trace in her mind. The changes in the body will also influence the mind. Whether this is good or bad for her is hard, or more likely impossible, to say. The physical and hormonal changes during puberty are difficult to deal with for many "normal" children; they are likely to be even more difficult to deal with for someone with a cognitive disability. But difficulties aren't necessarily bad either. Going through difficult phases helps us getting more mature, and I believe that even severely disabled people have a potential to mature. On the other hand, if it's more difficult than we can handle, it may be a traumatic rather than useful experience. So I don't think it's a valid argument to say that anything which can spare her some discomfort should be done because less discomfort = a better life quality, but I also don't think it's necessarily wrong to do some of those things. I think you are simplifying, as is ivanhoe. I don't think there is a simple answer as to what's right and what's wrong.
That is, do you disagree with the claim that she has a three-month
old mentality and that this status will not change?
Originally posted by Nordlys
The idea of a "mental age" is quite controversial, and I think even professionals who use this concept would agree that an adult with a mental age of three months is not exactly like a three months old baby except for the body. ... Going through difficult phases helps us getting more mature, and I believe that even severely disabled people have a potential to mature. ... I think you are simplifying, as is ivanhoe. I don't think there is a simple answer as to what's right and what's wrong.
Of course it is controversial and I wouldn't make the claim that an
adult with the mental age of three months is identical to a three-month
old baby. In fact, it is because her body is aging like other people's
bodies that the stress on her mind is magnified. A three-month old
baby can be comforted at the breast or in the arms of its mother; a
child in Ashley's condition cannot.
There is no simple, one-size-fits-all answer. But the difficult times
which are menstruation are extremely stressful for a mind which is
more or less prepared for it, one which can at least understand what is
happening. Ashley cannot and will never have any sort of conception
of her experiences (and this is not in dispute).
Situations like this have to be weighed individually, and in this situation
I'd say it's totally reasonable to go through with the operations given:
1) No loss of benefit to the individual; and 2) A diminishing of discomfort
for the individual.
Just because we 'feel' odd about it doesn't make it wrong (or right).
We need to justify it, and there are lots of reasonable justifications for
going through with these surgeries.
I've yet to hear a single argument against it other than the usual 'It's
wrong because I said so.'
Nemesio
Originally posted by NemesioAny evidence for that? Menstruation can be painful, but isn't necessarily so, and if it is, there may be different solutions to this specific problem. And as Ashley will probably always be incontinent, she's used to body fluids she can't control.
But the difficult times
which are menstruation are extremely stressful for a mind which is
more or less prepared for it, one which can at least understand what is
happening.
Just because we 'feel' odd about it doesn't make it wrong (or right).
We need to justify it, and there are lots of reasonable justifications for
going through with these surgeries.
I basically agree with that. What I am saying is that we can never be really sure if this is for the best of the child.
I've yet to hear a single argument against it other than the usual 'It's
wrong because I said so.'
Well, I didn't say it's wrong, but I see the fact that you might deprive her of a possibility to grow and mature as an argument against it.
Originally posted by XanthosNZYes. Medical professionals and parents have to make very difficult decisions, and most of the time they make them to their best knowledge, but they have no way of being sure either. In most cases we'll never know whether the decision was right. In some cases time will show, and there are enough examples of decisions or judgements which were bad or wrong in hindsight.
Who is we in this sentence? Is we, commentators from the outside? Does it include medical professionals who have examined the case in detail? Does it include the parents?
Originally posted by NordlysSo what exactly is Ashley being deprived of by this operation?
Yes. Medical professionals and parents have to make very difficult decisions, and most of the time they make them to their best knowledge, but they have no way of being sure either. In most cases we'll never know whether the decision was right. In some cases time will show, and there are enough examples of decisions or judgements which were bad or wrong in hindsight.
Originally posted by NordlysYou are right that we can never be 100% sure what decision is correct. Also in hindsight a lot of bad decisions have been made (which, in turn, improves our knowledge for future decisions). We all still have to make decisions based on our current knowledge though, otherwise we wouldn't progress.
Yes. Medical professionals and parents have to make very difficult decisions, and most of the time they make them to their best knowledge, but they have no way of being sure either. In most cases we'll never know whether the decision was right. In some cases time will show, and there are enough examples of decisions or judgements which were bad or wrong in hindsight.
Medical professionals and parents that know about this case in detail would have more current knowledge than we* do. Therefore, it is best in their hands about what decision to make.
* Us discussing it here in this thread.
