Time to take a short break from Halloween for a bit and talk about a controversial topic that's recently come into my sphere of attention. Eugenics. What is eugenics, some of you may be asking?

eu·gen·ics

the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, esp. by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics).

Sometime ago there was the big hoohah over 9-year-old Ashley X, whose parents requested she undergo a series of invasive surgeries to keep her in the pre-pubescent state she now will remain in till her death. She is a severely, severely mentally and physically disabled child, and their motive was love. This decision made by her parents rocked the disability community to its core, which erupted in outrage on the lil girl's behalf. Many believe it violates Ashley's basic human rights.

Now a similar case (that of Katie Thorpe) has popped up in the U.K. Again, there is the outcry against such procedures to keep another severely disabled youth in her pre-pubescent state. Again, the major motive here, is love, and the mother's defense: "...come and spend a week with me, walk in my shoes." Then, she thinks, those who do will begin to understand her reasoning. For, according to Mrs. Thorpe, "Katie has an undignified enough life without the added indignity of menstruation. She will not understand what is happening to her body and it could be very frightening for her."

*pauses, trying to gather thoughts and deciding where to go from here* These are two very touchy cases, and there are those who say what was done to Ashley and what is slated to happen for Katie is the right thing. After all, they cannot move on their own, talk or supposedly understand the biological changes their bodies would undergo. So, it's in their best interests to "protect" them from such natural changes and preserve their current state. Then there is the opposing camp that says such treatment is barbaric and is a violation of the girls' human rights, that there are other less invasive methods that would work just as well as a hysterectomy and are reversible, should the decision be rescended. Then there are those who stand somewhere in the middle. They understand or sympathize with the parents or guardian's point-of-view, but don't exactly see eye-to-eye with what was or will be done to these two young girls. Finally, there are those who just don't care either way.

Where do I fall in? After much thought and pondering and reading a few articles on both cases and perusing Ashley's parents' blog, I've found myself in the third camp. I understand the parents' motives for wanting to make life easier on their disabled children. I understand the girls may not understand what such life changes mean if they ever went through puberty. I understand the parents only did or will do what they think is best for their children, who are completely dependent, and will remain so all their lives, on those who love and take care of them. In a way, these cases remind me of what I recently wrote about guardianship. Who's to say what is right or wrong for a specific individual? What simply is the best for one person doesn't necessarily mean it's the best for another. And vice versa. Situations like these are not, and cannot ever be, black and white. There's too much to take into consideration.

While I understand and sympathize with the motives here for both cases, I have a hard time with the idea of sterilization and having decisions made for another individual without them being made aware. I think it's because of my own situation. While I have Cerebral Palsy and am in a wheelchair, I am capable of some mobility, of communicating and interacting with others and, with some help, am able to lead a productive life in society. I am able to make my own decisions too, and if anyone tries going over my head to make a decision without my input, believe me they'll hear about it!

As for being disabled and having a menstrual cycle, life is often messy and distateful--for everyone. It's a fact of life; and we better get used to it. I have seizures preluding, during or following mine. The whole process isn't fun, but I deal with it. If it means I can potentially have kids--who could very well be born able-bodied--I am glad to have these cycles. I am reminded now of a conversation I once had with a former care provider on the subject of menstruation. Apparently there is a hormone(?)/birth control shot that prevents menstruation for three months at a time, and she thought I should get it. My instant response was no. Hers was to insist, forcefully, I needed it. And she had that look about her that, if she ultimately decided it was best, she'd make me get it. Knowing this, the very scenario made me mad and brought out the resentful, stubborn mule in me. Fortunately, it never became an issue again.

I am grateful my parents, given certain circumstances in dealing with my disability, have mostly treated me no different than they have my siblings. Which brings me to something that may seem trival compared to the bigger issue of what is now known as the "Ashley Treatment" but bothers me: As I was perusing their blog explaining why they call Ashley their "Pillow Angel" and why they chose to have their daughter undergo the series of surgeries, I noticed the pictures posted. Ashley is unveiled for all to see, but, if you'll take the time to peruse the site at length, especially the pictures, you'll see every other member of her family's identities are blocked by a bar of black! I sit here and think how...stupid...or what a double standard it is for them to protect everyone else, yet show her. (Double standards are a major pet peeve of mine... They have been ever since I was a kid.) It bothers me that they think it's ok. That they see nothing faulty in their logic. And to call her Ashley X? And they want a bit of anonymity? *laughs sardonically* They should've take greater pains by changing her name, leaving out their city and making things equal by blocking her identity too!

Like I said, this may be trival compared to what was done to her, but it bothers me. I've probably said enough for now, and it's late, so I'll go. But if you want to read more on this topic, see what others have said about Ashley and perhaps Katie, then click here.

moon phase