Ashley Revisited: A Response to the Critics

American Journal of Bioethics 10 (1):30-44 (2010)
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
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
Edit this record
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Mark as duplicate
Request removal from index
Revision history
Download options
Our Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 29,848
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA
Protecting Groups From Genetic Research.Daniel Hausman - 2008 - Bioethics 22 (3):157–165.
"The Irreversible Disabling of a Child: The" Ashley Treatment".Gerald D. Coleman - 2007 - The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 7 (4):711-728.

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.
Ethics or Advocacy?Dick Sobsey - 2010 - American Journal of Bioethics 10 (1):59-60.

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.
A Response to My Critics.Richard M. Gale - 2003 - Philo 6 (1):132-165.
Conventions Revisited: A Reply to Critics.Andrei Marmor - 2011 - Jurisprudence 2 (2):493-506.
IV. A Response to My Critics.Terrence W. Tilley - 1997 - Philosophy and Theology 10 (1):93-99.
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.
Added to PP index

Total downloads
21 ( #259,802 of 2,210,536 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #166,029 of 2,210,536 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads
My notes
Sign in to use this feature