The BABY's bill of rights

On my way to work today I heard an interesting debate regarding two parents' decision to stunt the growth of their nine year old mentally disabled child, thereby, through artificial means, keep her childlike for the rest of her life. At nine years old, she has the bone age of a 15 year old, therefore, at about 4 feet 5 inches or so, she has already grown to 99% of her total height. Through surgery, she will never develop a womanly figure, nor be able to give birth, nor even to have menstruation like a fully grown woman.

Outraged callers from all over the world are tsk-tsking the actions and decisions of these parents and horrified at the violation of this child's human rights. However, they should bear in mind that the nine year old child has the mental capacity of a 3-month old baby, she can't lift her head, she can't walk, she can't even swallow food, but is fed through a feeding tube.

Although the procedures are indeed drastic and irreversible, and I question the long term health benefits of injecting her with such high doses of hormonal treatments to alter growth, let's face it, this is not a person capable of making and executing decisions for herself. Leave her on the street somewhere and she'd perish within a day or two. Her entire life is kept up through very artificial means. The word "normal" in her life is turned upside down. She may develop sex organs but she will not be a normal woman. The fact that she can develop "normally" in a physical way does not mean that in fact, she will indeed live a normal productive adult life.

Maybe I'm short on patience when it comes to the more practical matters, but the way I see it, the parents are the ones who will be her hand and foot slaves for the rest of their lives, If they feel they can take better care of her as a 65 lb "child" instead of a 150-200 lb grown woman, all the power to them. At the end of the day, taking care of a mentally disabled and physically incapacitated person is no walk in the park. The parents have actually written a blog trying to defend their decisions based on the fact that it was good for her, not just merely convenient for them. However, and this may be offensive to some people, I think it's perfectly alright that the parents may have also done these treatments on their daughter with the intent of making it easier on themselves too.

What is the problem here? This child, essentially a mindless creature, most likely devoid of self-consciousness, has the right to be loved and to be cared for by the people who will do so. That's IT. As far as I'm concerned, she has as many rights as the baby who has to get a polo vaccine shot. It would be absurd to expect a baby to clutch a baby sized pen in his chubby fingers and meticulously sign on the dotted line.