Not A Lawyer

The mother of a 15-year -old disabled girl in England has asked doctors to remove the child’s uterus so that she will not have to go through the pain of having a period.

The doctors are uncertain whether or not they can legally do what the mother is requesting.

Scope, a charity group in England that campaigns for disabled people have already spoken up on the issue. They say that removing the girl’s uterus would set a “disturbing precedent” and infringe upon basic human rights. they believe that the invasive surgery is not medically necessary, would traumatize the young girl and they fail to see how it would be in her best interests.

The disabled girl, Katie, has cerebral palsy and her mother says that the surgery would definitely be in the child’s best interests. She says that her daughter would not understand what is going on with her body during menstruation and it would be better for her not to have to needlessly go through the cramping, bloating and hormonal changes.

So what do you think? Should the caregiver mother be allowed to order surgery that is not medically necessary for her disabled daughter? I’m on the fence on this one. In some ways I see the benefits for the disabled child, but on the other hand it does set a dangerous precedent. What if her mother, for instance, wanted to have her legs removed because she had painful ingrown toenails, and was never going to walk anyway? See what I mean? How far is too far?

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

Stumble it!