Ashley Revisited: A Response to the Critics
American Journal of Bioethics 10 (1):30-44 (2010)
| Abstract |
The case of Ashley X involved a young girl with profound and permanent developmental disability who underwent growth attenuation using high-dose estrogen, a hysterectomy, and surgical removal of her breast buds. Many individuals and groups have been critical of the decisions made by Ashley's parents, physicians, and the hospital ethics committee that supported the decision. While some of the opposition has been grounded in distorted facts and misunderstandings, others have raised important concerns. The purpose of this paper is to provide a brief review of the case and the issues it raised, then address 25 distinct substantive arguments that have been proposed as reasons that Ashley's treatment might be unethical. We conclude that while some important concerns have been raised, the weight of these concerns is not sufficient to consider the interventions used in Ashley's case to be contrary to her best interests, nor are they sufficient to preclude similar use of these interventions in the future for carefully selected patients who might also benefit from them
|
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) |
| Categories | (categorize this paper) |
| DOI | 10.1080/15265160903469336 |
| Options |
|
Download options
References found in this work BETA
The New Conservatives in Bioethics: Who Are They and What Do They Seek?Ruth Macklin - 2006 - Hastings Center Report 36 (1):34-43.
The Ashley Treatment: Best Interests, Convenience, and Parental Decision Making.S. Matthew Liao, Julian Savulescu & Mark Sheehan - 2007 - Hastings Center Report 37 (2):16-20.
"The Irreversible Disabling of a Child: The" Ashley Treatment".Gerald D. Coleman - 2007 - The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 7 (4):711-728.
How Tall is Too Tall? On the Ethics of Oestrogen Treatment for Tall Girls.P. Louhiala - 2007 - Journal of Medical Ethics 33 (1):48-50.
View all 11 references / Add more references
Citations of this work BETA
Revisiting the Relevance of the Social Model of Disability.Sara Goering - 2010 - American Journal of Bioethics 10 (1):54-55.
Growth Attenuation: Good Intentions, Bad Decision.Adrienne Asch & Anna Stubblefield - 2010 - American Journal of Bioethics 10 (1):46-48.
It's Not the Growth Attenuation, It's the Sterilization!John Lantos - 2010 - American Journal of Bioethics 10 (1):45-46.
View all 12 citations / Add more citations
Similar books and articles
Ashley Revisited: A Response to the Peer Commentaries.Douglas Diekema & Norman Fost - 2010 - American Journal of Bioethics 10 (1):4-6.
The Case: The “Ashley Treatment” Revisited.Ruchika Mishra - 2010 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 19 (3):407.
The Ashley Treatment: Best Interests, Convenience, and Parental Decision Making.S. Matthew Liao, Julian Savulescu & Mark Sheehan - 2007 - Hastings Center Report 37 (2):16-20.
Book Review:Gold and Prices. W. J. Ashley; Environment and Efficiency. M. H. Thomson; The Social Policy of Bismarck. Annie Ashley. [REVIEW]Hugh Dalton - 1914 - Ethics 24 (2):246-.
The Ashley Case: The Public Response and Policy Implications.Benjamin Wilfond - 2007 - Hastings Center Report 37 (5):12-13.
Ageing Gametes and Embryonic Death: A Response to Bovens.Ashley Graham Kennedy - 2011 - Journal of Medical Ethics 37 (9):571-572.
Relativism Revisited and Revived: Replies to Critics.Joseph Margolis - 1989 - Social Epistemology 3 (1):39 – 53.
Personalism Revisited: Its Proponents and Critics (Review).Randall E. Auxier - 2005 - Journal of Speculative Philosophy 19 (1):81-87.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2010-09-14
Total downloads
24 ( #246,713 of 2,263,559 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #139,478 of 2,263,559 )
2010-09-14
Total downloads
24 ( #246,713 of 2,263,559 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #139,478 of 2,263,559 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Monthly downloads




