Ok, I'll try not to yell, but I agree this is something that rightly elicits
emotion.  In my previous response, I _was not_ defending the decision of the
mother in the UK, merely pointing out that she wasn't suggesting treatment
as drastic as "Ashley X's" parents advocated.  That's why I used the
"slippery slope" analogy.  We see the treatment that "Ashley" received as
horrifying, but the treatment of the young woman in the UK is not _as_
horrifying.  Who draws the line, and where is that line drawn?   When I was
in high school, I had a similar discussion with my mom about this; when
Janet and I started to date seriously, I revisited that discussion with my
sister (my mom had started to show the effects of Alzheimer's, so wasn't
able to discuss it), and we agreed that Mom wasn't very "enlightened" on the
subject, hence my comment that it might be easier for Janet's family than
mine, in an earlier post:

>My dad was one of those "well educated imbeciles" until I was born, and
then he quickly >learned that people with CP could, and should, be expected
to do the same things others do.



On 10/8/07, ken barber <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> i am not sure it sould be discussed without emotion.
>
> --- Joy Liebeskind < [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > THERE IS A VERY THIN LINE BETWEEN THIS & THE ASHLEY
> > X CASE. THE
> > ATTITUDE IS STILL THERE AS TO AN Y ONE PERSONS
> > VALUE.   IN A CHILD WITH
> > A DIAPER CARE WHEN THEY HAVE A PERIOD IS NO BIG
> > THING! JUST A LAZY
> > CARE-TAKER! WHO WILL DECIDE WHO THIS IS OK FOR & WHO
> > NOT? LOOK AT MANY
> > ADULTS WHOSE PARENTS PUT THEM IN INSTITUTIONS MANY
> > YEARS AGO WHO AS
> > THEY HAVE BEEN CLOSED HAVE COME OUT & ARE LIVING IN
> > THE COMMUNITIES
> > NOW?   THIS IS A VERY SORE TOPIC- I FIND THE Ashley
> > X case sickening-
> > look at little hints as to that families attitude-
> > they hide the faces
> > of siblings, but not hers! They wanted to keep her
> > small for their
> > benefit- not hers. Do away with all hormones & you
> > get weak bones,
> > heart issues- and many other problems.    I'm not
> > sure this can be
> > discussed without emotions--  Joy
> >
> > On Oct 8, 2007, at 5:57 PM, Kendall D. Corbett
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Kristina,
> > >
> > > What is troubling to me (and many others, I'm
> > sure) is the "slippery
> > > slope"
> > > argument surrounding sterilization for someone
> > with a disability.  If a
> > > person who is as severely disabled as the girl in
> > the UK is sterilized,
> > > where is the line drawn for others with
> > disabilities?
> > >
> > > I don't see this one as being as scary as the
> > "Ashley X" situation in
> > > the
> > > US, where "Ashley's" parents also had her breast
> > buds removed, and
> > > other
> > > growth attenuation procedures performed, but it
> > does make me wonder
> > > where
> > > the line will finally be drawn.
> > >
> > > Several states performed involuntary
> > sterilizations of people with
> > > disabilities, including the state where my mother
> > (and later my wife)
> > > grew
> > > up.  When my mom was going through nurses
> > training, she worked at the
> > > "Hospital School," where children with severe
> > disabilities were
> > > educated and
> > > provided health care services.  My wife was later
> > a student there for a
> > > little bit when she was in grade school, since in
> > the mid 60's, many
> > > small
> > > towns in that state didn't have access to the
> > needed services for kids
> > > with
> > > disabilities locally.  Since my wife wasn't a
> > "permanent" resident at
> > > the
> > > school, and her parents would  never have
> > consented, it wasn't an
> > > issue for
> > > her,  But even in the 50's and 60's there were
> > families who felt they
> > > couldn't adequately meet the needs of their child
> > with a disability.
> > > In
> > > these cases the children became "wards of the
> > state," so that they
> > > could
> > > meet the financial requirements to receive state
> > services.  It's
> > > families in
> > > these circumstances that I worry about.  In
> > Wyoming, and other states,
> > > there
> > > is presently a "push" to re-open or re-populate
> > institutions for
> > > people with
> > > disabilities.  This push is based on the perceived
> > "need" to keep
> > > people who
> > > work at these institutions employed, and a thinly
> > veiled attempt to
> > > provide
> > > people with disabilities and their families
> > another "choice" of service
> > > provision.
> > >
> > > I realize that this must be an agonizing decision
> > for parents of
> > > children
> > > with disabilities, but feel that in all cases, we
> > should err on the
> > > side of
> > > the least permanent option possible.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 10/8/07, [log in to unmask]
> > < [log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> I had a hysterectomy and the doctor said she
> > might take my apendix
> > >> (but
> > >> did
> > >> not)  Just to avoid it if it latter had
> > problems... I was OK
> > >> with  that.  It
> > >> is not something you can't live without and it
> > may save surgery
> > >> later.
> > >>
> > >> As to the hyster for the girl.  I am all for it.
> > But the mother can
> > >> do  meds
> > >> to stop period.  But I have been on the shot and
> > it made me sick...
> > >> so  I
> > >> say
> > >> go with pills.  But I can understand wanting it
> > stopped by
> > >> hysterectomy.
> > >> That way when the mother dies in years to come at
> > least the  girl
> > >> can't
> > >> end up
> > >> pregant in a care home somewhere.  Which is what
> > I worry  about with
> > >> my
> > >> own
> > >> girl... who is very pertty.   SO I REALLY worry..
> > no  that some sick
> > >> man
> > >> would
> > >> care if they are pertty.  Here in the US we hear
> > about someone being
> > >> in a
> > >> coma
> > >> or something and having a baby about every
> > year.... just think how
> > >> many
> > >> we do
> > >> not hear about.
> > >>
> > >> Plus.... I work in a hospital and see older
> > family members come to our
> > >> department with diaper soaked and all over the
> > bed.... at least
> > >> without
> > >> the  period
> > >> it would not add to the mess.
> > >>
> > >> Just my thoughts.
> > >> kristina
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ************************************** See what's
> > new at
> > >> http://www.aol.com
> > >>
> > >> -----------------------
> > >>
> > >> To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY
> > list, go here:
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=c-palsy
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > >
> > > Kendall
> > >
> > > An unreasonable man (but my wife says that's
> > redundant!)
> > >
> > > The reasonable man adapts himself to the world;
> > the unreasonable one
> > > persists in trying to adapt the world to himself.
> > Therefore, all
> > > progress
> > > depends on the unreasonable man.
> > >
> > > -George Bernard Shaw 1856-1950
> > >
> >
> === message truncated ===
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Catch up on fall's hot new shows on Yahoo! TV. Watch previews, get
> listings, and more!
> http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/3658
>
> -----------------------
>
> To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY list, go here:
>
> http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=c-palsy
>



-- 


Kendall

An unreasonable man (but my wife says that's redundant!)

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress
depends on the unreasonable man.

-George Bernard Shaw 1856-1950

-----------------------

To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY list, go here:

http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=c-palsy