Should Severely Disabled Kids Be Kept Small?

[Azriel]

[quote name='Mary-Kathryn' post='1109735' date='Nov 3 2006, 10:34 AM']

At any rate, messing with any human being to make it easier for yourself is so immoral I can't even begin to comprehend how someone can justify it. Deep down this is a throwback to the attitude of believing that the disabled are somehow less than human. [not the parents but the ones who brought this to them] If someone were to take a "regular" child and do this, the outrage would be over the top. A disabled child? mask it in mercy and love, and everyone goes awwwww.


[/quote]


So totally agreed. The disabled are still looked on in our society as "less than" And then we run into a problem of when is a enough, enough? Wouldn't it be easier on the parents ultimately if they had euthanized the child? But none of us would advocate that.

I understand their pain, but I cannot see this as anything but morally reprehensible.

And quite frankly the term "informed consent" makes my skin crawl.

[cmotherofpirl]

I could not do it, but after helping take care of one of these kids, I can understand why they did it.

[RC_]

[quote name='Azriel' post='1109811' date='Nov 3 2006, 12:30 PM']
So totally agreed. The disabled are still looked on in our society as "less than" And then we run into a problem of when is a enough, enough? Wouldn't it be easier on the parents ultimately if they had euthanized the child? But none of us would advocate that.

I understand their pain, but I cannot see this as anything but morally reprehensible.

And quite frankly the term "informed consent" makes my skin crawl.
[/quote]

You are comparing apples and watermelons here. Altering the growth cycle of a person is nowhere near the same as murder. If you can't see that, I feel sorry for you.


The parents don't want the easiest option--which would be a care home.

[Quietfire]

I have two nieces who are both handicapped. One is in a wheelchair. both are developmentally delayed. They both just turned 18.

With all the differences that my sister and I have had concerning religion, it matters not when it comes to those girls. She may have moved to Arizona, but she knows that one phone call would have me there at her side in a heartbeat.

I miss them all.
But the idea of altering a childs growth so that their care could be managed better sounds so selfish.

Sure, I remember fondly how cute the girls were when they were younger, but they're both beautiful young women now, disabilities or not. It has been a honor watching them grow.

I could never imagine taking that away from them.

[RC_]

I still don't see any selfishness in the parents' actions.

They may be misguided, but they are not being selfish. If they were being selfish, they'd ship thier child off to a home. They're trying to give their daughter the best care they can.

[KizlarAgha]

I hate to bring this into it, but there would probably be less discrimination from the public. I've found that developmentally disabled teenagers and adults often aren't looked upon with the same sympathy as developmentally disabled children.

[Mary-Kathryn]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1109749' date='Nov 3 2006, 10:59 AM']
You can have all the respite care in the world and it doesn't erase the burden on the parents. Most states or insurance companies refuse to pay for 24 hour home care, there simply isn't enough money to go around, they tell you to put the child in a state home and give up your rights. The burden always falls on the loved ones unless your named Trump.[/quote]


Is our burden supposed to be eased? Is our suffering supposed to be as any 'mainstream" parents? Who knows, but the sooner you stop running, the better you'll do. Finding the solution comes with time, not with a couple of articles. We are called to walk...not a higher...but a different...path. It's full of alot of unknowns and alot of fears. Those fears don't get any easier as the child gets older, but if you let them overtake you, you can drown in them. I can't help but think,this may have helped push these parents. They drowned [with alot of help from some alarmist doctors] I don't know what it's going to be like in 10 years for my child, heck I don't know if I'm going to be alive or if he's going to be alive. He's a healthy boy, so I place my bets on him. : I can't count my days, only God can.

What I can do for him is to just let him have his life and try to plan for others to care for him. If I live long enough, that day will come. I may one day be too frail to help with his daily needs, or too absent-minded for his medicine, or to remember his many appointments and his meal needs. I may not be able to drive him to his volunteer time, parttime job, or buddy-times if he does any of those things in the future. Who will care for him then? I am not on earth for an eternity. Trust God, plan, and let go. It's all I can do. In the end, my son's going to be OK.

In the end, it brings to light how far it is we have to go to recognize that the disabled, even the severely disabled, are TRULY human beings. I shudder to think how many future families may be encouraged to alter their children because God's Work is not good enough for us.

~now I'm pooped 'cause I'm not a debater person at ALL~

[Thy Geekdom Come]

I didn't read the whole article, but judging by the very idea, I think it's wrong. To keep a person from growing in order to keep them convenient, no matter how "inconvenient" they may be, is to stunt their development as a human person and to limit their potential. It violates human dignity.

[MIKolbe]

i think it is wrong.

the road to hell is paved with good intensions.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Raphael' post='1110068' date='Nov 3 2006, 04:58 PM']
I didn't read the whole article, but judging by the very idea, I think it's wrong. To keep a person from growing in order to keep them convenient, no matter how "inconvenient" they may be, is to stunt their development as a human person and to limit their potential. It violates human dignity.
[/quote]
I think then maybe you should read the whole article. Limiting physical growth is not the same as limiting their human potential as a human person.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1110082' date='Nov 3 2006, 07:04 PM']
I think then maybe you should read the whole article. Limiting physical growth is not the same as limiting their human potential as a human person.
[/quote]
The human person is a composite of body and soul. I believe that purposely limiting either is a violation of the human person.

[Azriel]

[quote name='RC_' post='1109889' date='Nov 3 2006, 02:17 PM']
You are comparing apples and watermelons here. Altering the growth cycle of a person is nowhere near the same as murder. If you can't see that, I feel sorry for you.
The parents don't want the easiest option--which would be a care home.
[/quote]


Oh please don't feel sorry for me. I realize that they aren't the same thing, but where do we draw the line to what is acceptable? If we allow for this behavior - how far will people go to "do what's best" for their child? What happens when you find a set of Godless parents who believe death is the much more "acceptable" solution. Why not go further and play geneticists before they are born?

Do you see where this could go?

I realize that my judgement is clouded. I've cared for a developmentally, and physically disabled child. One who wasn't born that way, but suffered a severe brain injury. Stunting his growth may have made it easier to take care of him, but at who's cost? We advocate for the right for human dignity. How can this be dignified?

My heart breaks for anyone who has to deal with a special needs child. Unfortunately, I will never know what it is like to care for one that gets older. My Godson died at 6 1/2.

I'd much rather have him here as a MUCH larger 10 year old.

We are all given crosses to bear. I stand by my conviction. Altering a human child from its normal path of growth is reprehensible.

[KizlarAgha]

[quote name='Azriel' post='1110121' date='Nov 3 2006, 05:40 PM']
Oh please don't feel sorry for me. I realize that they aren't the same thing, but where do we draw the line to what is acceptable? If we allow for this behavior - how far will people go to "do what's best" for their child? What happens when you find a set of Godless parents who believe death is the much more "acceptable" solution. Why not go further and play geneticists before they are born?

Do you see where this could go?

I realize that my judgement is clouded. I've cared for a developmentally, and physically disabled child. One who wasn't born that way, but suffered a severe brain injury. Stunting his growth may have made it easier to take care of him, but at who's cost? We advocate for the right for human dignity. How can this be dignified?

My heart breaks for anyone who has to deal with a special needs child. Unfortunately, I will never know what it is like to care for one that gets older. My Godson died at 6 1/2.

I'd much rather have him here as a MUCH larger 10 year old.

We are all given crosses to bear. I stand by my conviction. Altering a human child from its normal path of growth is reprehensible.
[/quote]

Does that include parents who use human growth hormone to make their children with dwarfism taller?

[homeschoolmom]

I don't think HGH is used to overcome dwarfism, but rather to supply hormones that are not being developed (for whatever reason)... in the same way we give insulin to people who are not creating it themselves.

[KizlarAgha]

[quote name='homeschoolmom' post='1110131' date='Nov 3 2006, 05:47 PM']
I don't think HGH is used to overcome dwarfism, but rather to supply hormones that are not being developed (for whatever reason)... in the same way we give insulin to people who are not creating it themselves.
[/quote]

Right, but technically that's not normal for those people. It's an alteration made for their benefit.

Edited November 3, 2006 by KizlarAgha