My wife is a regular reader of the topics within this forum and, I do from time to time view them myself, respecting her wish to remain anonymous I have created a 'log in' of my own in order that I may comment on the subject matter. As surgeon (who has performed hysterectomies) in the Uk and a parent of 3, I'd like to feel my opinion is as valid as any other member of this site wether they be male or female.
As regards 'the Ashley treatment' I would not not under any circumstances carry out the same procedures on any of my children nor would I be prepared to do so to any other child, 90% of medical professionals I have spoken to echo my sentiments. The very word 'treatment' on the parents website (which I have read in detail) is misleading for although Ashley suffers extensive mental disabiltity her physical health appears good and is no need of 'treatment'. Almost certainly the procedures involved would not be allowed within the Uk.
The uterus is often mistakenly assumed by some to be purely a reproductive organ, it is however a major component of female anatomy, the primary function being to pass hormones in to the blood stream. Whilst it isn't unknown to perform hysterectomies on otherwise healthy individuals the procedure isn't undertaken lightly, put simply the operation can be complex and indeed presents significant risks. Once removed the body then has lost a vital organ controlling the hormonal balance, hence the need for HRT. The removal of a heathly uterus from an otherwise healthy body will increase the likelyhood of strokes, osteoporitis, cardiovascular problems and bladder problems significantly. Whilst it cannot be said for certain wether Ashley will suffer similar problems in later life statistics suggest its far more likely (in the case of cardiovascular problems the probability is around 7 times as great).
Stunting a persons growth by hormonal intervention likewise poses risks and in young maturing body without a uterus regulating things these risks are considerable. It doesn't take a lot of imagination to realise artificially stunting growth in an otherwise healthy body will indeed present problems in later years. Its been stated in Ashley's case her skeletal development resembles that of a 15yr old rather than a 9yr old. Though not life threatening, the risks of arthritic problems and possible deformity are again increased significantly.
As I understand the case Ashley having had surgical carried out still undergoes regular procedures involving the use of general anasthesia in order that experts can monitor what is happening. An earlier poster to this thread posed the question 'what would happen if she died during surgery?' it's a question that upset many, it is however a valid comment.
A considerable number of respondents have expressed disgust at the possibilty Ashley's parents have carried out this 'treatment'(?) for reasons of convenience, the fact remains however they have openly said that is precisely the case. In their eyes a woman with the body of a 9yr old will be easier to move etc, no-one can dispute that, but in the interests of lessening their burden Ashley will almost certainly pay in later years.
Of course her situation was considered in great depth by the Ethics commitee, that however doesn't mean they are correct. American ethics differ greatly from those of the Uk, they have the death penalty where as we don't. They allow 'treatment' like this on an otherwise healthy 9yr old where as we wouldn't. I'm by no means an expert in the field of American ethics in relation to medicine but I can assure people that in the Uk any sensitive issues like that of Ashley are viewed from the point of 'will it benefit the patient ?'. It would appear to a great many that in Ashley's case the benefit of her treatment will largely satisfy the needs of her parents which will hopefully cascade to down to Ashley herself, It does seem very much as if her needs are placed secondary.
I can appreciate the comments made by others that her dignity will be better served in the body of a 9yr old who isn't suffering the trauma of adult menstrual cycles etc whilst having the mind of a baby, it could however be argued her dignity (certainly her physical health) would be better realised in the body of an adult without the continual ordeal of treatments and surgery preventing her from maturing naturally.
Harsh at it is I'm afraid Ashley isnt a little 'bonsai baby' who can be kept artificially small, she's growing to be an adult and for her own dignity and health she should have been given that fundamental right.