Sign in or 
ADAPT Youth Appalled at Parents Surgically Keeping Disabled Daughter |
Version Compare
| Version | User | Scope of changes |
|---|---|---|
| Jan 30 2007, 10:50 AM EST (current) | creamcandycane | 581 words added |
| Jan 30 2007, 10:50 AM EST | creamcandycane |
Changes
Key: Additions Deletions
Youth members of the national disability rights organization, ADAPT, today
expressed shock and outrage on behalf of the entire national membership of
ADAPT at the news of nine-year-old Ashley from Seattle, whose parents had
her uterus, appendix and breast buds removed, in addition to having her
undergo hormone injections in order to minimize her height and weight as
she grows older.
In their blog, Ashley's parents have rationalized these drastic measures
to manipulate Ashley's size and physical maturity by saying it will be
easier for them to care for her and involve her in family activities. "As
a young woman with a disability, I am extremely disturbed on multiple
levels by Ashley's situation," said Amber Smock of Chicago, Illinois. "I
am angry that Ashley's parents, the medical establishment and society at
large think it is acceptable to surgically and hormonally manipulate
Ashley because the reality of her adulthood as a person with a disability
is too "grotesque" for them. With these drastic measures, her parents and
doctors are physically reinforcing the disrespectful attitude held by many
that people with disabilities are all "childlike," and can be treated like
property or science experiments." Ashley has now become a modern day
symbol of the long and dishonorable tradition of sterilizing people with
disabilities. In 1927 the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Buck vs. Bell
upheld that tradition as a way to "eliminate defectives from the gene
pool." Today, parents and others rationalize sterilization by saying it
will prevent any possibility of pregnancy from abuse. Ashley has not been
reported to be at risk of either abuse or pregnancy, and her parents say
that her only caretakers are themselves and her grandmother. Ashley's
parents also say in their blog that removal of her uterus will prevent her
from having periods. For over two decades there have been far less
invasive means of suppressing menstruation in women when medically
indicated. It is not known why Ashley's parents resorted to the much more
invasive procedure of a hysterectomy. "Perhaps even more distressing to
those of us with disabilities," said Smock, "is that a medical ethics
committee supports treating Ashley not as a human being, but as a
"problem" to be managed in a way they wouldn't consider or allow for other
children. We have enough difficulty with the medical establishment's
power over our lives, and its lack of recognition of disability as a
social status and not a medical problem that must either be "cured" or
"killed." "This case opens the door for other people with disabilities to
be subject to mutilation and chemical castration, simply because we have a
disability. The severity of Ashley's disability does not mean that it's
okay to treat her as less than a full human being," continued Smock. "The
impact of Ashley's situation is not limited to just her and her family.
Ashley's mutilation has started us down a slippery slope where her case
could very well be used as a precedent to damage one person with a
disability after another. Instead of mutilating children, we need to put
our energy into assuring that people with disabilities and their families
have the support they need to age naturally and live lives of quality in
their own homes and communities."
On behalf of ADAPT, Youth ADAPT members encourage the Seattle Childrens
Hospital ethics committee that approved the invasive procedures to issue a
statement acknowledging the socially and other harmful aspects of what
Ashley's parents are now touting as the "Ashley treatment."
expressed shock and outrage on behalf of the entire national membership of
ADAPT at the news of nine-year-old Ashley from Seattle, whose parents had
her uterus, appendix and breast buds removed, in addition to having her
undergo hormone injections in order to minimize her height and weight as
she grows older.
In their blog, Ashley's parents have rationalized these drastic measures
to manipulate Ashley's size and physical maturity by saying it will be
easier for them to care for her and involve her in family activities. "As
a young woman with a disability, I am extremely disturbed on multiple
levels by Ashley's situation," said Amber Smock of Chicago, Illinois. "I
am angry that Ashley's parents, the medical establishment and society at
large think it is acceptable to surgically and hormonally manipulate
Ashley because the reality of her adulthood as a person with a disability
is too "grotesque" for them. With these drastic measures, her parents and
doctors are physically reinforcing the disrespectful attitude held by many
that people with disabilities are all "childlike," and can be treated like
property or science experiments." Ashley has now become a modern day
symbol of the long and dishonorable tradition of sterilizing people with
disabilities. In 1927 the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Buck vs. Bell
upheld that tradition as a way to "eliminate defectives from the gene
pool." Today, parents and others rationalize sterilization by saying it
will prevent any possibility of pregnancy from abuse. Ashley has not been
reported to be at risk of either abuse or pregnancy, and her parents say
that her only caretakers are themselves and her grandmother. Ashley's
parents also say in their blog that removal of her uterus will prevent her
from having periods. For over two decades there have been far less
invasive means of suppressing menstruation in women when medically
indicated. It is not known why Ashley's parents resorted to the much more
invasive procedure of a hysterectomy. "Perhaps even more distressing to
those of us with disabilities," said Smock, "is that a medical ethics
committee supports treating Ashley not as a human being, but as a
"problem" to be managed in a way they wouldn't consider or allow for other
children. We have enough difficulty with the medical establishment's
power over our lives, and its lack of recognition of disability as a
social status and not a medical problem that must either be "cured" or
"killed." "This case opens the door for other people with disabilities to
be subject to mutilation and chemical castration, simply because we have a
disability. The severity of Ashley's disability does not mean that it's
okay to treat her as less than a full human being," continued Smock. "The
impact of Ashley's situation is not limited to just her and her family.
Ashley's mutilation has started us down a slippery slope where her case
could very well be used as a precedent to damage one person with a
disability after another. Instead of mutilating children, we need to put
our energy into assuring that people with disabilities and their families
have the support they need to age naturally and live lives of quality in
their own homes and communities."
On behalf of ADAPT, Youth ADAPT members encourage the Seattle Childrens
Hospital ethics committee that approved the invasive procedures to issue a
statement acknowledging the socially and other harmful aspects of what
Ashley's parents are now touting as the "Ashley treatment."
