![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
When the wheels start spinning...
In London, England a mother is seeking to have the womb of her severely disabled daughter removed to prevent the 15-year-old from feeling the pain and discomfort of menstruation. I'm going to give you a minute to let that sink in.
Still sinking?
Sunk?
Me too.
A fellow disabled blogger posted in an online community that ze felt that the disabled blogging community was a bit speechless as to this sort of thing (see: Ashley Treatment) because it was entirely different than the usual meanderings of the community. I agree. As a standard, we talk about access, we talk about autonomy, some of us talk about sex and sexuality, there's race politics and education, equal access and employment, fashion and self-care, interpersonal dynamics and abuse/misuse, brilliance and stupidity, etc. But this is a different beast altogether.
This beast is that of whether or not we even get to exist at all. In any shape. It seems like such a trivial thing, one for snark-sentences and spit-backs at the likes of O'Reilly and all of Fox News. It reeks of novellic hysteria and barbaric sociological ideology. Instead, it's a modern medical fad. Now caregivers can design their own little mini-version of a person so as to make life easier. On them.
The excuse used in the case of Katie X is interesting. There's no indication, as in Ashley X's case, that there may be complications if menstruation were allowed to continue. Instead, like with Ashley X, Katie X would simply be inconvenienced so let's butcher her! All hands on deck, it's time to de-womanize another crip! De-sexualize another gimp! She won't know any better, she's a cripple and mute.
Frankly I'm not forgiving of the caregiver argument. Don't get me wrong, I value those who care for those who can't or for whatever reason are unable to care for themselves, but I don't think that grants carte blanche to making individual medical decisions out of convenience. What's next? Chopping off the legs of the elderly disabled because they wander off? Are we going to start lobbing off the arms of the blind because they sometimes run a hand into an unwelcome or dangerous situation? Where's the line?
What new line are we drawing up for disabled women? For disabled bodies? When is it liberation and when is it genocide?
Still sinking?
Sunk?
Me too.
A fellow disabled blogger posted in an online community that ze felt that the disabled blogging community was a bit speechless as to this sort of thing (see: Ashley Treatment) because it was entirely different than the usual meanderings of the community. I agree. As a standard, we talk about access, we talk about autonomy, some of us talk about sex and sexuality, there's race politics and education, equal access and employment, fashion and self-care, interpersonal dynamics and abuse/misuse, brilliance and stupidity, etc. But this is a different beast altogether.
This beast is that of whether or not we even get to exist at all. In any shape. It seems like such a trivial thing, one for snark-sentences and spit-backs at the likes of O'Reilly and all of Fox News. It reeks of novellic hysteria and barbaric sociological ideology. Instead, it's a modern medical fad. Now caregivers can design their own little mini-version of a person so as to make life easier. On them.
The excuse used in the case of Katie X is interesting. There's no indication, as in Ashley X's case, that there may be complications if menstruation were allowed to continue. Instead, like with Ashley X, Katie X would simply be inconvenienced so let's butcher her! All hands on deck, it's time to de-womanize another crip! De-sexualize another gimp! She won't know any better, she's a cripple and mute.
Frankly I'm not forgiving of the caregiver argument. Don't get me wrong, I value those who care for those who can't or for whatever reason are unable to care for themselves, but I don't think that grants carte blanche to making individual medical decisions out of convenience. What's next? Chopping off the legs of the elderly disabled because they wander off? Are we going to start lobbing off the arms of the blind because they sometimes run a hand into an unwelcome or dangerous situation? Where's the line?
What new line are we drawing up for disabled women? For disabled bodies? When is it liberation and when is it genocide?
(Anonymous)
Talk about powerlessness and ...
On the other hand, is this girl ever going to have children? She clearly won't be able to care for them, and I firmly believe that every child should be a wanted child. If it makes this girl's quality of life better, what is the problem?
That's quite the twisted viewpoint. Victim-blaming abounds.
Even if you don't believe it, I am probably just as upset about this situation as you are. I've worked as a volunteer for the disabled for years, and members of my family work as advocates for the blind. As for myself, this information will be filed in my mind with the rest of the ammunition I use when I deal with public officials on issues dealing with disabled persons. It's fine to be upset about this, but it's better to put that emotion into action - letters to legislators demanding reform in regulations governing nursing care facilities so parents don't need to even think about these sorts of things.
b) your insinuation that work isn't being done is condescending
c) I find the idea that anything other than disgust at the system and the practice to be victim blaming
Of course, some women have cramps and/or PMS that are disabling, but you just can't assume that's going to happen to everyone.
can say nothing more
this story makes me ache.. it's kind of like why we don't talk about suicides... we need to talk about stuff like this but then we have copy cat shit like this!
Bastards.