In 2006 a case report was published about a 6-year-old girl, Ashley, who has profound developmental disabilities and was treated with oestrogen patches to limit her final height, along with a hysterectomy and the removal of her breast buds. Ashley's parents claimed that attenuating her growth would make it possible for them to lift and move her more easily, facilitating greater involvement in family activities and making routine care more straightforward. The ‘Ashley treatment’ provoked public comment and academic debate and remains ethically controversial. As more children are being referred for such treatment, there is an urgent need to clarify how clinicians and ethics committees should respond to such requests. The controversy surrounding the Ashley treatment exists, at least in part, because of gaps in the literature, including a lack of empirical data about the outcomes for children who do and do not receive such treatment. However, we suggest in this paper that there is also merit in examining the parental decision-making process itself, and provide empirical data about the reasoning of one set of parents who ultimately chose part of this treatment for their child. Using the interview data, we illuminate some important points regarding how these parents characterise benefits and harms and their responsibilities as surrogate decision-makers. This analysis could inform decision-making about future requests for growth attenuation and might also have wider relevance to healthcare decision-making for children with profound cognitive impairment.
- Minors/Parental Consent
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Agency, duties and the “Ashley treatment”
- Growth attenuation therapy: practice and perspectives of paediatric endocrinologists
- Ashley X: a difficult moral choice
- Parenting acceptance and commitment therapy: a randomised controlled trial of an innovative online course for families of children with cerebral palsy
- Substituted judgment, procreative beneficence, and the Ashley treatment
- #warriors: sick children, social media and the right to an open future
- Parenting, child development and primary care—‘Crescer em Grande!’ intervention (CeG!) based on the Touchpoints approach: a cluster-randomised controlled trial protocol
- The best interests test at the end of life on PICU: a plea for a family centred approach
- The Ashley treatment: a step too far, or not far enough?
- Quality of life in Chinese children with developmental dyslexia: a cross-sectional study