Child with Down Syndrome: Plastic Surgery
Introduction
Child with Down Syndrome portion similar features such as its effects on their facial characteristics. The bandwagon of most kids protracts such characteristics as excess tegument. As a consequence. these kids have an epicanthic fold crease that is extra tegument on their palpebras inner corners. In add-on. they have slanted oculus gaps instead than the horizontal gaps. a characteristic referred to as slant palpebral tissues. Besides. such kids have flattened rhinal span and may besides hold downturned lower lip and level mid-facial zone. Notwithstanding. they may hold an unfastened oral cavity with a stick outing lingua. Plastic surgery was proposed in the seventiess as a manner to reconfigure their children’s facial characteristics to retrieve from Down Syndrome. Surgery recoveries for this complaint are categorized into facial Reconstruction and lingua surgery. The intervention attack has elicited assorted argument on the parenting and parenting rights. This paper argues that parents of kids with Down Syndrome should non subject their kids to plastic surgery to do them look more conventional.
To get down with. intercessions to alter the organic structure of a kid may affect usage of medical specialties. surgery or endocrines. Conventionally. such intercessions inflicted some physical harm to the kids and are by and large optional ( Ameen & A ; Boby. 2013 ) . The processs to reshape the organic structure of a kid are irreversible. invasive and potentially unsafe. However. the fact these determinations are made apathetic to therapy demands differentiates them from similar parental determinations that design the kid. Indeed. current Torahs do non see the difference in these determinations. and hence. parents can make up one’s mind to subject their kids to assorted organic structure determining. Current Torahs are apathetic to kids organic structure determining determinations although they raise concerns on kid rights. parental rights every bit good as parent duties.
In the U. S. A for case. it is constitutionally and in common jurisprudence embalmed that competent grownups decide on their personal medical determinations. These determinations go beyond lifesaving intervention. unsafe decorative processs and election intervention. In this respect. kids are non considered as competent grownups. Ethicists argue that adolescents and immature kids should make up one’s mind on their medical processs. However. the jurisprudence vests determination doing for adolescents and kids on their defenders and parents withy limited limitations. Therefore. lawfully. parents are free to make up one’s mind among different options including plastic surgery to reshape their kids.
Obviously. there is much as interest when parents are allowed to subject their kids to plastic surgery even when the kids have Down Syndrome. First. plastic surgery inflicts physical injury as it involves piercing and cutting of the tegument ( Ouellette. 2010 ) . Besides. it may imply remotion of variety meats or tissues every bit good as injection or anaesthetizing with endocrines. Consequently. the kids stand at a hazard of enduring malignant neoplastic disease. nerve harm. high blood pressure. diabetes or decease in utmost instances. Notwithstanding. such kids are likely to endure from psychological hazards associated with hurt to individuality and stigma. Still. the piercing. film editing and shooting the stamp tegument of kids constitute kid maltreatment.
For ages. plastic surgery was a formula for asceticism and apparent rich or a needed recovery intervention for birth malformations and trauma agonies. However. today. it is an optional decorative surgery accessible to people of all economic constructions and ages ( Ouellette. 2010 ) . In malice of these. this paper is of the sentiment that it should be accessible to grownups merely. For this ground. the research worker does non harbour ailment will against plastic surgery for intervention but decidedly militias it for grownups merely. Therefore. this is non a expansive conceptualisation to show a teenage miss for chest implants to rejuvenate her low ego regard. Neither should a teenage male child be subjected to plastic surgery for tegument acne cicatrixs. Alternatively. parents should tally for a few more old ages for them to do these determining determinations in their maturity.
Parents of kids with Down Syndrome subject their kids to plastic surgery to do them look “more conventional” . To get down with. “conventional” is a comparative word in Down Syndrome vocabulary because most kids tend to take after other members of their household ( Ameen & A ; Boby. 2013 ) . Therefore. there is nil unusual. So. conventional is a term used to flourish kids with Down Syndrome by their parents to mention to a “less embarrassing” expression. Note that I do non utilize any peculiar term for that intent. As a consequence. my boy and girl are my kids. period! If they have Down Syndrome. they are non normal. Wyrd. and conventional or anything like that like their senior siblings or non. They are my kids. period!
Coincidentally. parents subjecting their kids to decorative surgery claim unconditioned love to their kids ( Ameen & A ; Boby. 2013 ) . However. they volitionally. unswayed and independently expose their kids to trouble and enduring in an attempt to throw a screen over their holding Down Syndrome. Most of the parents claim to extenuate humiliation. embarrassment and hurting from badgering by “fitting them in” .
Pardon my denseness. but I wonder how it helps a child with larning disablements learns that his parents were highly abashed and ashamed of their mentality that they would hold spent astronomically to change by reversal the state of affairs ( Ameen & A ; Boby. 2013 ) . Equally. I wonder how it helps the kid when it is teased at school for being “unconventional” while the equals can non state that the kid has Down Syndrome. For this ground. parents of kids holding Down Syndrome should non subject their kids to plastic surgery. They should wait for the kids to go of age and do personal determinations. After all. plastic surgery is an irreversible status.
Mentions
Ameen. F. . & A ; Boby. C. ( 2013. June 4 ) . Rearing a Child with Down Syndrome. HubPages. Retrieved December 27. 2013. from hypertext transfer protocol: //society-parenting. hubpages. com/hub/Parenting-a-Child-with-Down-Syndrome
Ouellette. A. ( 2010 ) . Determining P arental Authority Over Children ‘ s Bodies. Indiana Law Journal. 85 ( 3 ) . 956-1001.
Beginning papers
