Posted on 05/08/2007 2:13:24 PM PDT by llevrok
SEATTLE - A Seattle hospital acknowledged breaking state law when doctors performed a hysterectomy on a severely developmentally disabled girl whose parents have pursued medical treatments to stunt her growth, making her easier to care for.
Sterilization surgeries must not be performed on children without a court order, Children's Hospital and Regional Medical Center said Tuesday after an investigation by Washington Protection and Advocacy System. The hospital also agreed to appoint "someone with a disability rights perspective" to its ethics committee.
Doctors performed the experimental surgeries in 2004, removing the girl's uterus and breast buds. The girl, identified only as "Ashley," was 6 years old at the time. The hospital's ethics committee supported the treatment, which included hormone therapy, but noted before the surgeries that court review would be required.
A lawyer for the girl's parents disagreed, saying the state law did not apply in Ashley's case, and the hospital performed the procedures without court permission. Ashley was diagnosed with severe brain damage shortly after birth, and her condition has left her in an infant state, unable to sit up, roll over, hold a toy or walk or talk.
"We deeply regret that a court order was not obtained and that an independent third party was not sought to represent Ashley. We take full responsibility for the miscommunication between the ethics committee and the treating physicians," said Dr. David Fisher, the hospital's medical director. "We have introduced new safeguards so that procedures requiring a court order will have one obtained before they begin."
Ashley's doctors touched off a highly charged ethical debate when they wrote about her treatment in October's Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine. Some critics decried the parents' actions as perverse and akin to eugenics. Her parents maintained that keeping her small would make her more comfortable and allow them to move her more easily and take better care of her.
On their blog Tuesday, Ashley's parents praised the vigilance of the advocacy group that investigated the case. But they also said they hoped requiring court orders in such cases would not create obstacles for parents seeking the best care for their disabled children.
"As responsible and loving parents, deeply concerned for the well-being of our child, we provided a better quality of life to our Ashley, who is doing very well under our love and care," they wrote. "We hope that other families of the many children like Ashley will likewise be able to care for and benefit their children without undue obstacles."
"People concerned with the rights of individuals with disabilities still have a lot of questions about why this type of invasive and irreversible procedure would be performed on a 6-year-old," said Curt Decker, National Disability Rights Network executive director. "We hope that the agreement between WPAS and Children's Hospital will be the first step in resolving this issue and that the long-term result will be an end to the use of the 'Ashley Treatment.' I know the entire disability community will be carefully watching the implementation of this agreement."
Just when you think you can’t get any more repulsed by the Left....
Ashley was diagnosed with severe brain damage shortly after birth, and her condition has left her in an infant state, unable to sit up, roll over, hold a toy or walk or talk.
“People concerned with the rights of individuals with disabilities still have a lot of questions...”said Curt Decker, National Disability Rights Network executive director. “... I know the entire disability community will be carefully watching the implementation of this agreement.”
Mrs VS
Disgusting. A prosecution is in order here.
Yes, you are right. The parents, faced with a tragedy, are dealing with it the best way they know how. It is a disgrace that they are being second-guessed, when a less committed parent would have let her die.
“...doctors performed a hysterectomy on a severely developmentally disabled girl whose parents have pursued medical treatments to stunt her growth, making her easier to care for.”
It’s all about convenience. Same with abortion and Terry Schivo’s husband who had already abandoned the marriage and was living with another woman...
The “quality of life” crowd would question if she should even be alive.
I agree with you. The parents are trying to act in the best interests of the family, not only themselves, but their daughter. It appears that they did put some thought behind this.
I will preface this that IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, I believe the parents made a legitimate decision and should have been allowed to do so. I would not say EVERY case parents ALWAYS should be able to do whatever without anyone revieweing it.
The factors for me are is that these parents have a severely brain damaged young child, and they are thinking about how they are going to be able to care for her as they age and lose functionality themselves. They want to be able to take care of her, she is not going to have a normal life in her condition, she has no prospects of a normal marriage and family life of her own in her condition, they will be the primary caregivers of her as long as they are all alive, and while it is an unorthodox move, I think it fits in with them and their desire to be able to care for her as long as she is alive. They don’t want to dump her on anyone.
A lawyer for the girl's parents disagreed, saying the state law did not apply in Ashley's case, and the hospital performed the procedures without court permission.
IMHO if anyone should be punished for this, it should be the parents lawyer. Not that that will happen, in almost every case lawyers stick together.
6 years old!!! OMG I was expecting the article to say she was 14 or 15 and they were afraid of molestation and pregnancies; soliciting maybe a tad bit of sympathy, but 6 years old! Who gives a 6 year old a hysterectomy! That is insane and criminal.
Good post...........
IMHO The law and the hospital ethics committee called for a court mandate. I totally agree that the parents are doing their best when others would have let this child die, and most likely the court would have agreed IN THIS CASE. Even if it had not agreed, the rule of thumb is that if you don’t like the law, you work to change it... you don’t put yourself above it. The hospital is at fault here, as far as I can see. Shall we discuss the number of times hospitals practice euthanasia by not treating pneumonia in the elderly, or by double-dosing morphine? Medical workers often see themselves as in the vanguard, and as such often practice beyond the law, and this is not right.
You've GOT to read better. She was 6 years old in 2004, not now. She's about 9 or 10 now.
These are the same m***********s that push the concept of deaf couples denying operations that would save their children's hearing, in an effort to "preserve a hearing impaired lifestyle."
"miscommunication"? Jeeez, what a steaming pantload. Everyone knew what everyone was doing here.
Easier to seek forgiveness after than to ask permission before.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.