Hackneyed stereotyped conventional ignorance about amputation
jralessi at hotmail.com
Thu Feb 3 09:14:07 PST 2000
Right away you have to drag poor ol George back into the mix. Leave the man
alone he has nothing to do with it. Please.
My point is the choice should be yours completely regardless of your
emotional motivation. I would think they would have had the desire or they
wouldn't be asking the doctors to remove it. Right?
If an otherwise healthy person wanted their legs removed because they
felt they didn't have any choice then they are demonstrating they are not
capable of making the choice and shouldn't be a surgical candidate.
By your argument you disqualify the person from the only available
remedy. Now you have to decide exactly where to draw the line on who's
capable of making the decision and who isn't.
>From: Dan Pop <Dan.Pop at cern.ch>
>Reply-To: amp-l at u.washington.edu
>To: "Amputee Information Network" <amp-l at u.washington.edu>
>Subject: Re: Hackneyed stereotyped conventional ignorance about amputation
>Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2000 17:54:27 +0100 (MET)
>On Thu, 3 Feb 2000, Joe Alessi wrote:
> > That really wasn't the topic though. The topic was should elective
> > be available to anyone who wants a healthy limb removed. I say it's in
> > same category as any other elective cosmetic enhancements and should be
> > allowed.
>Then, you have no idea about the persons who get their healthy limbs
>removed. It is NOT an "elective cosmetic enhancement", it's the ONLY
>remedy *currently* available to a very serious, life long obsession.
>According to GB, his choice was between pointing his shotgun at his
>head or at his leg. A choice between amputation and death, like so
>many "legitimate" amputees had to make.
>The amputation was the cure to GB's life threatening psychiatric
>problem, not a cosmetic enhancement. And he didn't do it before
>trying all the other options offered by the mental care
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
More information about the Amp-l