I really find this topic of inter-sex something that is very difficult for me to understand. Over the past few days in class we have been asked the questions, what does “normal” mean, how do we determine what is “normal” and how does our standpoint theory play a role in making such decisions. I have never really thought about what “normal” means, but after watching that video I have learned people who are inter-sex are not treated like “normal” people. I was incredibly horrified at watching the story about the little boy Patrick. He was born inter-sex and the doctor was persistent in removing his penis and one testis because he didn’t believe he would be able to function as a normal male. I remember sitting there during the video thinking to myself who is this doctor to violate his Hippocratic oath and perform a life altering procedure on an infant without parental consent.
My opinions towards the overall film began to change from anger to more of a sense of a lack of a representation of the whole picture during the latter part of the film. During the second selection viewed in class all people interviewed were unhappy with either the surgery that they had received because it had left them with genitals that were numb, scarred, and did not function properly, or had been lied to by family about being born inter-sex. I am a firm believer in integrity, but I believe that this film was very biased in only presenting a pro-inter-sex view that is anti-surgery to correct genital deformities. I know that there are people are there who were born inter-sex and had this surgery and are probably grateful that their parents made that very difficult decision for them. A decision to be a boy or a girl is I think the most difficult decision anyone can ever be asked to make because it is so crucial to ones identity and I can just not see how a child can grow up living a “normal” life inter-sex.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I think that your comment about the Hippocratic oath in term’s of the TLC video on intersex is a very important observation. It seems like the video portrayed the doctors as secretive monsters who lied to Patrick’s adoptive parents from birth and eventually succeeded in removing his testicle without reason. Something that I feel would have been interesting to follow up on is the defense of the doctors and more information about what really went on in the hospital and what happened legally following the surgery. Patrick’s’ mother claimed that the doctors held him in the hospital for eleven days following his birth before she demanded to take him home. I highly doubt that while Patrick was in the hospital for eleven days, the doctors did nothing. I wonder what in fact what the doctors official reasoning was for keeping Patrick in hospital care and what medical procedure was being done. The video hinted that doctor’s wanted to “fix” his genitalia from the beginning, but there was no surgery performed, so were they just stabilizing him until they could to the surgery, or giving him hormones, or what? The second medical quandary surrounds his actual biopsy procedure where the doctor ended up removing Patrick’s testicle. His mother eventually uncovered the medical records which claimed that Patrick’s’ testicular tissue was healthy, so how could the doctor justify the removal, or did he or she not even try? And did Patrick’s mother sue for malpractice? If not, I think that this sis a subject that deserves more attention is the legal framework so that surgeries without consent performed on intersex people can be prevented.
I feel similarly about the first video watched in class. The doctor is made out to be this malicious monster when in fact I feel like he is trying to help the child fit into society easier, easier transition. If in fact he did a nonconsentual procedure I think that is the wrong way to go about it, but I can't imagine how I would feel if I was born intersex and had to struggle through the beginning years of my life trying to decide what sex I wanted to be. It's hard enough growing up as a girl; if I had to deal with growing up with both male and female issues I think I would have a breakdown. That is one decision that most people are inherently born with and don't have to make for themselves. I wouldn't want to pick my sex. Honestly, I think I would rather my parents pick for me. I know I say this now, but I feel like it would make things easier. Cheryl Chase said that one of the ISNA's advocacy points is to raise a child as either male or female and let the child decide later in life what sex they want to commit to. I can't imagine that the transition from a male to a female or from a female to a male in the middle of ones life is going to be easy or well accepted by one's friends and family, let alone society.
I am so glad to see that several of my peers agree that both of the films we viewed in class were biased and potentially misleading. I am currently a pre-med student here at Emory and nothing makes me happier than thinking about the lives of the people who I will impact one day. There is a quote in The Little Prince, by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry that represents what medicine means to me: “Tu deviens responsable pour toujours de ce que tu as apprivoisé.” The translation is “You become responsible, forever, for that which you tamed.” In Saint-Exupéry’s story a fox is explaing to the little prince that they are forever bonded, because of the time and devotion that they have spent together, just as doctors are forever responsible for the impact that they have upon their patients.
Though the doctor described in the first movie we watched should not have removed the patients’ testicle without the consent of his parents, that doctor must forever live with his medical decision. It cannot be easy for a medical professional to decide the future of the sex of his patient, just as it is not easy for a parent of a child with ambiguous genitals. Imagine the burden put on doctors and parents that is chosing the sex of an infant. I believe (perhaps naïvely) that most doctors are only acting with the best interests of the patient in mind. Not every individaul is going to be happy with the decision that their parent or doctor makes for them as a baby, however, I do not think that there is ever any malicious intent behind the actions. Perhaps a little more tolerance is needed from intersex individuals towards doctors and parents? I know as a future doctor I would appreciate the understanding that although you might be unhappy with my medical decision, I am aware of my responsibility for my decision.
You all raise some very interesting points.
The first clip we watched was an excerpt from a TV special on TLC. It is obviously not without its particular "standpoint". Intersex activists are very much aware that the dominant narrative or the narrative that one hears most often is that these procedures are surgically necessary and benifit the child. In reaction to that they are very unapologetically raising their own critiques as people who felt wronged by lies and what they feel are medically unnecessary surgeries.
I wonder why doctors standpoints are considered more valild than those of intersex individuals. I also wonder to what extent "fitting in" and being "normal" are constructs we should be examining as well. Do you all believe that society is unable to change long standing beliefs over time? Is society incapable of dealing with difference?
Post a Comment