You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 161 No. 5, May 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  The Pediatric Forum
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (2)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related letter
 •Related articles
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Medical Practice
 •Medical Ethics
 •Child Development
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Growth Attenuation: Unjustifiable Non-therapy

Hank Bersani, PhD

Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2007;161(5):520-521.

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

Gunther and Diekema1 provided the case of a 6-year-old girl with profound and multiple impairments who underwent a hysterectomy and "growth-attenuation therapy." The intention was to avoid a future out-of-home placement by ensuring that the child remained small in stature, thereby helping her parents to continue to care for her. As leaders of the American Association on Mental Retardation, the oldest multidisciplinary association in the United States representing professionals within the field of intellectual and developmental disabilities, we endorse policies and actions that help families to rear their children at home, and we applaud the efforts of the many professionals who provide extraordinary care to children with intensive and pervasive support needs. However, we view growth-attenuation as a totally unacceptable option. Brosco and Feudtner2 raised serous concerns, and we add to those.

Gunther and Diekema recognized little potential for the growth and development of this child. However, . . . [Full Text of this Article]

AUTHOR INFORMATION



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

RELATED LETTER

Growth Attenuation: Unjustifiable Non-therapy—Reply
Daniel F. Gunther and Douglas S. Diekema
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2007;161(5):521-522.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

RELATED ARTICLES

Attenuating Growth in Children With Profound Developmental Disability: A New Approach to an Old Dilemma
Daniel F. Gunther and Douglas S. Diekema
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2006;160(10):1013-1017.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Growth Attenuation: A Diminutive Solution to a Daunting Problem
Jeffrey P. Brosco and Chris Feudtner
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2006;160(10):1077-1078.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Agency, duties and the "Ashley treatment"
Tan and Brassington
J. Med. Ethics 2009;35:658-661.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2007 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.