re: Pillow Angel

Quoting Melinda.:“ I definately do not agree with what was being said, I was just pointing out that a belly button and ... [snip!] ... breasts are not really comparable. I think that if someone was going to get turned on by her they would do so breasts or not.”

I'm just refuting what you said, whether or not you actually hold said opinion is immaterial.

Though thank you for clarifying.

C.

Quoting Baby Girl-Liesel May:“ My mother had to have a reduction which was covered by her insurance because the were causing MEDICAL problems with her back.”

ok, but who is to say that Ashley would have had huge breast, not like she is walking around or standing all day for them to become so much of a back strain

Quoting Shaquana:♥'s:Jade:“ Not True, some people have belly button fetishes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navel_fetishism A navel ... [snip!] ... to the navel is the same or very similar to arousal at seeing genitals (or the sex-specific features like female breasts).”

I get turned on by belly buttons. I wouldn't say it's a fetish because I don't need it for sexual arousal... but I do find them to be a turn on sometimes.

C.

Quoting Shaquana:♥'s:Jade:“ no, actually u said that breast are sexually arousing.....so are belly buttons. thank you”

What are you 'no-ing'?
Breasts are sexually arousing to some people, yes. So are belly buttons. What's your point? She was saying breasts get in the way, a belly button does not. Go back and read her original post as to why she brought up empathisizing with them being removed. I've already said I don't agree with it, so I don't know what you're trying to accomplish by arguing with me.
You do, clearly, miss the point.

Quoting Baby Girl-Liesel May:“ My mother had to have a reduction which was covered by her insurance because the were causing MEDICAL problems with her back.”

There's a difference between a reduction and complete removal.

If her breasts become a problem in the future, then do a reduction surgery then.

It's unusual to do surgery on the chance that something might happen. (Actually, I take that back. That's one of the main reasons circumcision is done... because they might have a medical problem in the future that requires it, so just chop it off now before it's a problem. But that's OT so I digress)

C.

It will make Ashley's life easier too. She'll be able to get the care she needs much quicker, and with less man-handling. (140* pounds versus 80*,that's a big difference especially for a woman to lift.(*just approximations))

Quoting Melinda.:“ Are you seriously going to reach for it? There are fetishes for a lot of things, I'm not going to ... [snip!] ... at a comparison. You can't chop off a belly button, it's a hole. If you're going to counter point at least make it worthwhile.”

To be fair, while you couldn't remove it, you could surgically alter it out of all recognition.

C.

Quoting God:“ To be fair, while you couldn't remove it, you could surgically alter it out of all recognition. C.”

Haha. True, though I don't know why anyone would actually put themselves through all that for the sake of arguement.

What do you think about what they've done?

Quoting Baby Girl-Liesel May:“ I sympathize with her parents. You don't need a a child with the capabilities of a six month old to weigh ... [snip!] ... to worry about menustration a what not. The surgery made it easier for them to help her, as she will need it her whole life.”

I'm sorry but I completely agree with you..it seems that all the people who think the surgeries were inhumane are saying that out of their own selfishness because THEY would feel bad doing that to Ashley, or even their own child because they think she should make her on decisions and get to adult height (which doesn't matter because she will not be able to make her own decisions). Point blank is that Ashley will not ever have a normal life, she will always be taken care of by her parents. The quality of care by her parents is really the only thing Ashley has so I believe the operations were the best choice and for not only Ashley's good, but her parents will better be able to care for her which will give her the best quality life she can have.

I really don't see how that is arguable that is is inhumane, or just plain out wrong. It is what is best for Ashley and her parents and will give her the best care...

While I think it was wrong to do this to a child, more than likely it would have happened anyway. For a child w/ a mental capacity of a 6 month old the courts would have probably sided w/ the parents and granted them permission to have the surgery performed.
It would have been just as controversial w/ the court order. Its done.
I don't think the parents would have come up w/ the idea on their own. A physician probably pitched the idea. The dr is no longer alive.
I live in Seattle (well the vicinity) and my daughter was in there for 4 days in the NICU. Its a great hospital. Were they wrong. Yes. They admitted they were wrong.
I feel for the parents. I'm up in the air as to whether I think it was justified or not. I'll have to think about it.
I do think its wrong that the parent did the surgery to make their lives easier. I also think that this is a little girl who will never have children anyway. A lot of us know how painful menstration can be. What would be the point in her having a uterus if she will never bare children? IDK!! So confused.

I'm of the minority opinion on this one. The removal of breastbuds and the hysterectomy were, yes, invasive and unneccessary. However, I would support long term birth control to stop periods as well as medications that prevent adult growth. Why?

I saw a report about this some time ago--while they didn't interview the family in question, they did interview a family with a grown daughter with the same issues, as well as other families in a similar situation. All supported the growth reduction, and when the situation was explained, and I did a bit of reading, so did I. These children generally have less mental and physical capabilities than a 6 month old infant. What does an infant thrive on? As a mother, I know how important physical contact is--it is the primary means of conveying love and comfort to my son. In addition, I mentally stimulate my son by changing his scenary--pushing him in a stroller, walking him around, ect. It is VERY difficult, if not impossible,to give a person with an adult body the same complete physical contact--holding, cuddles, love, moving around,to say nothing of caring for basic needs, that it is easy to give a child, and that an infant needs. By stunting thegrowth of people who are, in essence, perpetual infants, the parentsof these people are allowing them to get thecloseness,affection, and stimulation that they NEED.

So, while I do not support the invasive and unneeded portions of the treatment in question, I support the stunting of growth in the case of a "pillow angel" absolutely.

I know there are a lot of what ifs following, but I'm putting it out there anyway.

Medical advancements with stem cells is a real possibilty, what if what is wrong with her can be repaired in the future? I don't think it is fair that the chance for that has been taken away from her. While a period may be inconvient, there are ways around that, that do not require the removal of her uterus. I think that menstruating is a reason why women have longer life spans than men.

Quoting Melinda.:“ Haha. True, though I don't know why anyone would actually put themselves through all that for the sake of arguement. What do you think about what they've done?”

I understand that the parents did what they perceived to be in the best interest of their child and family, but I just can't agree with it. It was done illegally, for starters. I feel they should have waited for the legal consent, because I don't think it was a matter that needed to be attended to immediately (though I grant that I could be wrong. I'm not well versed in this condition).

This just isn't something that I can't be ok with, on an ethical level, even if I do see the practical purposes for it. I also honestly think a great deal of the motivation is to make it easier for the parents.

C.

Quoting My Evil Twin:“ I'm of the minority opinion on this one. The removal of breastbuds and the hysterectomy were, yes, invasive ... [snip!] ... unneeded portions of the treatment in question, I support the stunting of growth in the case of a "pillow angel" absolutely.”

I can agree with using non invasive measures such as the ones you mentioned, because I do see the need to make it the easiest possible to provide the attention the girl needs... but as there are non invasive measures available, I can't be ok with the route they took.

C.

I agree that they shouldn't have done it since it wasn't legal, but I understand why they did it.