Ethics

Normally, I wake up in the morning, sip some coffee, and then start writing a blog post for y'all.

It's one of my favorite things to do in the whole world.

But this morning I stumbled upon a story that has me totally flummoxed. I want to write about it, but I'm not sure what to think.

Here's the story:

Parents defend decision to keep girl a child

three years ago, when Ashley began to display early signs of puberty, her parents instructed doctors to remove her uterus, appendix and still-forming breasts, then treat her with high doses of oestrogen to stunt her growth.

In other words, Ashley was sterilised and frozen in time, for ever to remain a child. She was only 6.

Ashley, the daughter of two professionals in the Seattle area, never had much hope of a normal life.

Afflicted with a severe brain impairment known as static encephalopathy, she cannot walk, talk, keep her head up in bed or even swallow food. Her parents argued that “keeping her small” was the best way to improve the quality of her life, not to make life more convenient for them.

The ethics of this situation blows my mind.

The above photo is of "Ashley X", but before you base judgments on this photo, let's remember the edited video of Terri Shiavo that supposedly proved that she was still sentient.

This blog is all about "counterpoints" - it's an exercise in critical thinking. But I've never even imagined such a scenario, and I'm curious what you think.

Did the parents and doctors engage in ethical behavior?

Do we even have a right ask such a question since Ashley isn't our child?

What would you have done?

Should this procedure be banned in the future?

Bookmark/Search this post with:
| | | | | | |