[statecom-discuss] Ashley's Medical Treatment

[Betty H. Zisk]

I have lost track of just where we began the discussion and I am sorry. Does
someone want(Martina?) us to take a policy stand on this? If so, is there a
draft statement that I have somehow missed? How does this involve us as the
GRP, if at all? If there is a bill before the Mass legislature what does it
say and can we support it?

Please dont get me wrong--I am all for taking a principled position (though
I find it hard to understand what that might be other than preventing child
abuse and I am not sure that fits in this case). But I want to know why it
is that we are debating so heavily and how it fits into our party agenda.
The same thing applies as far as I am concerned to our endless debate over
past behavior on Palestine issue. I want so badly for us to grow beyond
heated debates and to take on issues like universal health insurance or
global warming. Or even fair election practices. And I sometimes wonder why
it is that we as a party spend so much energy on debating issues that have
no genuine solutions or even clear moral imperatives. But I am more than
willing to listen if someone will enlighten me. I respect Grace. I respect
all of you who seem to see the way out of this one. But I dont understand
the relevance here. I think I am echoing someone named Jeff but I dont know
him and I am not a part of a concerted effort because I dont understand what
cause it is that we are trying to support.  Betts

-----Original Message-----
From: statecom-discuss-bounces at green-rainbow.org
[mailto:statecom-discuss-bounces at green-rainbow.org]On Behalf Of Maureen
Doyle
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 4:25 PM
To: Discussion List for StateCom members
Subject: Re: [statecom-discuss] Ashley's Medical Treatment


 I can't believe this is so huge. Can i remind people
of what was previously written by someone (Jeff?):
"Again, what is the relevance? Ashley wasn't aborted,
she's wanted
by her
> > family. She is not going to be euthanized for her
disability. On
the
> > flip side of
> > "Yuppie Eugenics" are the recent stories of deaf
parents (and
little
> > people
> > parents) choosing to have similar children. But
it's still not
Ashley's
> > situation."

The operations will help people take care of ashley!!
It is not like she will ever have a family herself and
it does say that her family loves her! they want her
life to be as smooth as possible!

--- Adam Sacks <adam_artist at yahoo.com> wrote:

>
> Melissa, if you as a parent are able to commit your
> entire life to taking care of a three-month old in
> an adult body, all the more power to you, and my
> hat's off to you.  Apparently not everyone can do
> that, for many conceivable reasons.  Given that the
> support system is what it is, not what we'd like it
> to be, other people are making different and
> difficult choices.  Similarly, if I were a perennial
> three-month old, I suspect I would have other
> concerns than the functions of my reproductive
> system.  My decisions - if my actions at that mental
> age could be categorized as "decisions" - would be
> more along the lines of immediate pleasure, and were
> I able to articulate it I would likely select a
> shorter life of immediate pleasure.  (Of course it
> doesn't take a three-month-old to elect for shorter
> lives of immediate pleasure - that's the way
> Euro-American culture seems to work, with disastrous
> consequences.)
>
> Either way, I don't think this issue is black and
> white, and I'm struck by how willing we are to make
> quick blanket judgments about complex personal
> issues.
>
> Adam
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Melissa Harrell <lissagrp at gmail.com>
> To: Discussion List for StateCom members
> <statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 1:44:30 PM
> Subject: Re: [statecom-discuss] Ashley's Medical
> Treatment
>
> >   Ashley doesn't live there.
>
>
> No, Ashley lives in this country, where the standard
> of care is such that
> cutting her life short for the convenience of her
> caretakers is not ok. This
> isn't a moral issue, this is an issue of
> malpractice.
>
> I can assure as the mother of four girls, you do not
> want to be the doctor
> to dare to suggest such an outrageous treatment.
>
> P.S. - If doing something out of love is not at
> least an element in moral
> > measurement (assisted suicide comes to mind, for
> example), what is?
>
>
> If your parents castrated you to make you easeir to
> handle and more
> portable, thus dooming you to an early death, would
> you still think think
> it's morally ok?
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> > From: "Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com"
> <Gracegrnrnbw at aol.com>
> > To: statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2007 11:59:46 AM
> > Subject: Re: [statecom-discuss] Ashley's Medical
> Treatment
> >
> > Adam - actually I have offered lots of different
> analogies and information
> > -
> > exactly because not analogy is perfect.
> >
> > I think, however, that you exactly missed my
> point.
> >
> > My point is that the parents' "options" are
> circumscribed by bad social
> > policy.   Which is actually one the implication of
> your "hard choices"
> > paragraph.
> >
> > And, fo course, that saying simply that parents do
> something "out of love"
> > is
> > not a moral measure.
> >
> > I suspect that part of the disagreement we
> (everyone engaging in this) is
> > whether we primarily identify with the parents or
> with Ashley.
> >
> > I have yet to hear anyone attack the parents.
> >
> > for instance, as activists with a systemic
> viewpoint, we don't generally
> > attack particular parents for carrying out the
> binding of their children's
> > feet
> > when that was the tradition in China, or for
> genetal mutilation of girl
> > children
> > in parts of Africa, or for the binding of young
> girls with corsets as was
> > done in the US so their chest bones warped and
> sometimes actually broke as
> > they
> > grew into adulthood so they would have stylish
> narrow waists.
> >
> > We generally recognize these as culturally sexist
> and oppressive
> > traditions
> > and policies not so much that particular parents
> are "bad".
> >
> > thanks, Grace
> > PS - isn't it interesting that so many of these
> practices are about women,
> > about making them sexually acceptable to those who
> will care for them and
> > include pretty serious, invasive physical
> procedures?
> > In a message dated 1/30/07 10:23:21 AM,
> adam_artist at yahoo.com writes:
> >
> >
> > > "If there were plenty of help and services, and
> the parents really love
> > > Ashley, they would not have done this."
> > >
> > > Grace, I don't see how you can make this
> remarkably presumptuous
> > assumption
> > > ("really love Ashley").  Perhaps, among the many
> divisions in the world,
> > is
> > > that of those who are parents and those who are
> not.  Parents make these
> > > decisions, potentially life-changing, every day
> in essence if not in
> > degree (e.g.,
> > > to vaccinate or not, how long to breast feed,
> whether to undergo medical
> > > procedures, what school to go to, whom it's OK
> to play with and where,
> > how much
> > > TV to watch if any, when it's OK for child to
> walk/bike/travel by
> > > her/himself, or drive the car, or eat certain
> foods) because children
> > arrive at their
> > > ability to make decisions at different time,
> often unpredictably from
> > child to
> > > child - and frequently caregivers must make
> decisions with far-ranging
> > > consequences on behalf of a child who may simply
> and absolutely be
> > incapable of
> > > doing so.
> > >
> > > Granted that there is a continuum (a "slippery
> slope" or a ragged one)
> > along
> > > which some people are capable of making
> decisions, some are allowed to
> > make
> > > decisions by those who decide who's allowed to
> make decisions, some are
> > not
> > > allowed to make decisions, and some who simply
> cannot.  Who falls into
> > which
> > > category depends on many factors, including
> politics, racial and gender
> > bias,
> > > medical status, age, social transgressions
> ("crime"), results on
> > > "standardized" tests, wealth, and undoubtedly
> many others. Frequently
> > the decisions are
> > > deplorable, and cast deep shame over our past
> and present actions.
> > > Occasionally the decisions are enlightened.  But
> such decisions are
> > usually fraught
> > > with doubt and error among the most
> well-intentioned people.
> > >
> > > We're basing this discussion about Ashley almost
> entirely on hearsay
> > > information, but assuming that her capacity as a
> three-month-old is
> > correct, her
> > > caretakers have very personal and difficult
> decisions to make, and
> > consequences
> > > to live with.  We are in no position to judge
> whether
=== message truncated ===




____________________________________________________________________________
________
Cheap talk?
Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates.
http://voice.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
statecom-discuss mailing list
statecom-discuss at green-rainbow.org
http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom-discuss