NationStates Jolt Archive

This lady has a mental condition that makes her want to remove her legs. She tried freezing one off with dry ice twice in order to force doctors to amuptate. She's pretty comitted to going through with this. I think doctors should just go ahead and amputate her legs. It's less dangerous and painful than forcing her to freeze the legs into solid blocks before they'll do the surgery. What do you folks think of this?

http://society.guardian.co.uk/health/story/0,,2000991,00.html

Ummm...I guess it isn't any dumber than the "bug chasers" I read about in Rolling Stone...

they are her legs, surely she should be the one who choses what happens to them?

I agree, let her mutilate her body any way seewants. Jesus, freez your legs off?

Think of the money she would save on shoes.

I'm all for surgeons performing the operation. Just as long as they go through the same process [well, similar] process as a pre-op transgender. They should go through a lenghthy screening process to make sure that's definately what they want and they don't have some other underlying mental disorder.

I hope I never get the same urges.

Wow......

Wow......that is interesting, to say the least.

This is ridiculous. We'll soon be in a society full of cripples, retards, and homosexuals claiming to be normal and being treated as such. Most of them should just be thrown off a cliff. You might say I have no heart, but we euthanized Barbaro and dogs are put down daily. It's called keeping the gene pool clean and pure and not allowing mutations to exist. This isn't eugenics, it's what Nature had intended.

They have hospitals for people like this, hospitals with nice jackets with crossover sleeves that tie in the back and rooms with padded walls. :eek:

This is ridiculous. We'll soon be in a society full of cripples, retards, and homosexuals claiming to be normal and being treated as such. Most of them should just be thrown off a cliff. You might say I have no heart, but we euthanized Barbaro and dogs are put down daily. It's called keeping the gene pool clean and pure and not allowing mutations to exist. This isn't eugenics, it's what Nature had intended.

Homosexuals? What do they have to do with this crazy woman? :confused:

But I would say, that it's necessary to put her in an asylum - she has a serious mental problem. You should try to solve this before she starts foolish things that can't be repaired.

Well, that urge would be awkward. *wake up* hmmmm..... I feel like legs are obsolete and i should have them removed... YAYAYAYAYAYAY

This lady has a mental condition that makes her want to remove her legs. She tried freezing one off with dry ice twice in order to force doctors to amuptate. She's pretty comitted to going through with this. I think doctors should just go ahead and amputate her legs. It's less dangerous and painful than forcing her to freeze the legs into solid blocks before they'll do the surgery. What do you folks think of this?

http://society.guardian.co.uk/health/story/0,,2000991,00.html

Uh...what the fuck?

What a fucking freak.

Lol, someone should just kill her. She is willing to lose a leg, pay so much money in hospital bills, become disabled so people will have to take care of her just because her legs "doesnt feel right".

Meh, if that's what she wants then fair enough.

Homosexuals? What do they have to do with this crazy woman? :confused:

But I would say, that it's necessary to put her in an asylum - she has a serious mental problem. You should try to solve this before she starts foolish things that can't be repaired.

Because they are mutations just like the other things I mentioned.

Because they are mutations just like the other things I mentioned.

Mutations? There genes may be different, but they neither hurt themself nor other persons. In fact, they can life a normal life like other people.

This woman is something else - she seems to have severe mental illness, which hopefully can be healed without destroying her life.

Because they are mutations just like the other things I mentioned.

(Loses all respect for Sel Appa)

(Loses all respect for Sel Appa)

You know, it's really best to start from a base of zero respect and have them work their way up.

Because they are mutations just like the other things I mentioned.

You realize of course, the deep irony considering that humanity wouldn't exist without mutations.

We'd still be plankton. :p

This is ridiculous. We'll soon be in a society full of cripples, retards, and homosexuals claiming to be normal and being treated as such. Most of them should just be thrown off a cliff. You might say I have no heart, but we euthanized Barbaro and dogs are put down daily. It's called keeping the gene pool clean and pure and not allowing mutations to exist. This isn't eugenics, it's what Nature had intended.

You poor man. Im gay, and I have done nothing wrong. I will not defend my position other then; I defy you.

It would be pointless to defend, when fighting your ego; under the assumption that you would want to learn instead of be ignorant.

Go on hating, I...I will go on, not loving you, not hating you; indifferent.

By my simply being happy, enrages you.

In laughter, :D
-Rafe

You realize of course, the deep irony considering that humanity wouldn't exist without mutations.

We'd still be plankton. :p

What?! We are all mutants?!:eek:

I'll jump from the next cliff which I see!

(Luckily, I don't live at the coast. ;) )

Meh, if that's what she wants then fair enough.
Yeah, well, I don't know.

This is opening a whole can of worms, which is weird because it's just so... outlandish.

On the one hand, one would have to agree with you, especially considering the discussion in your "Transsexual at 12" thread the other day - her arguments of "I've always known I was simply born into the wrong body" certainly sound familiar.

But at the same time, I don't know, it's... different. I can believe it when someone says their gender is different from their sex, and I'm all for them changing their sex accordingly. But this? I don't know.
So I hope I'm missing some really obvious and vital difference between this Body Identity Integrity Disorder and transsexualism (and I may well be) because otherwise that would mean I have a double-standard, right?

But at the same time I'm thinking that many people suffering from severe anorexia have the same kind of actual, literal misperception of their bodies (it's probably the same BIID syndrome, I'll have to look it up) that she has - so should we not try to cure them? As in, should we not have them go through psychotherapy so as to close the gap between how they are and how they perceive themselves to be and instead let them die?

Gah, my brain is all messy now.

They have hospitals for people like this, hospitals with nice jackets with crossover sleeves that tie in the back and rooms with padded walls. :eek:

Did you watch the Discovery show about this? A psychiatrist attempted to find the "underlying mental illness", and had to conclude that she was perfectly sane. No problems with reality perception, no depression, none of the obvious.

If you think of it legally, people get done liposuction - healthy tissue removal - to get rid of a perfectly normal, natural potbelly, and no one's throwing them into the padded cell. Maybe this is like the old saying "erotic is using a feather, perverted is using the whole chicken".

... And while we're at it, think of male circumcision. How's that perverted, mutilating babies?

Let her have her legs removed if she wants. It's her legs.

I don't see disability support as a problem, at least not in her case. Obviously she has a genuine need to get rid of her legs, so I don't see how the "But she put herself in the situation" argument applies. She doesn't seem to have created the problem any more than a victim of an accident has.

And yea, quality of life is more important to me than 0.00001$ a year of my income is, so if that's what it takes, she's welcome to it. I may be a bastard, but I'm not a miserable bastard.

Sel Appa there's a reason we have mental hospitals, and you're it. Off you go then.

You know, it's really best to start from a base of zero respect and have them work their way up.

Nah. I wasn't raised that way.

This is ridiculous. We'll soon be in a society full of cripples, retards, and homosexuals claiming to be normal and being treated as such. Most of them should just be thrown off a cliff. You might say I have no heart, but we euthanized Barbaro and dogs are put down daily. It's called keeping the gene pool clean and pure and not allowing mutations to exist. This isn't eugenics, it's what Nature had intended.

Without mutations there would be no evolution. And nature intended for mutations to exist thats why nature created them.

Without mutations there would be no evolution. And nature intended for mutations to exist thats why nature created them.

lolsarcasm

"Nature" meant for us to have mutations, yes.

It also meant for those too weak to survive alone to die.

Mutations? There genes may be different, but they neither hurt themself nor other persons. In fact, they can life a normal life like other people.

This woman is something else - she seems to have severe mental illness, which hopefully can be healed without destroying her life.

They are not and never will be normal.

You realize of course, the deep irony considering that humanity wouldn't exist without mutations.

We'd still be plankton. :p

I meant bad mutations that just are a hindrance, like 6-fingered hands.

You poor man. Im gay, and I have done nothing wrong. I will not defend my position other then; I defy you.

It would be pointless to defend, when fighting your ego; under the assumption that you would want to learn instead of be ignorant.

Go on hating, I...I will go on, not loving you, not hating you; indifferent.

By my simply being happy, enrages you.

In laughter, :D
-Rafe

I didn't say you did anything wrong, nature fucked up.

Without mutations there would be no evolution. And nature intended for mutations to exist thats why nature created them.

See above.

"Nature" meant for us to have mutations, yes.

It also meant for those too weak to survive alone to die.

That's true, but most hunger today is caused by society and not nature. The human population is much bigger than it should be though.

This is ridiculous. We'll soon be in a society full of cripples, retards, and homosexuals claiming to be normal and being treated as such. Most of them should just be thrown off a cliff. You might say I have no heart, but we euthanized Barbaro and dogs are put down daily. It's called keeping the gene pool clean and pure and not allowing mutations to exist. This isn't eugenics, it's what Nature had intended.

Wow... what an ass. O_o

I have to clarify. Homosexuals need not be thrown off cliffs. They should just be not able to birth children. I also have to say that my beliefs assume we are true animals, which we have diverged from and it is considered unacceptable to believe this.

The question is...


To pro-lifers, is every leg sacred?
And to pro-choicers, is a woman's legs included in her right to choose?

. They should just be not able to birth children.

They pretty much have that covered.

I also have to say that my beliefs assume we are true animals, which we have diverged from and it is considered unacceptable to believe this.

You do realize that some animals are gay, don't you?

They pretty much have that covered.



You do realize that some animals are gay, don't you?

Female homosexuals can still get a male to impregnate them. That is unfortunate, but it happens. I'm saying we don't accept death as we should and keeping alive things that shouldn't, like babies born months early(yay another thing to be berated about).

All she had to do was lay on some railroad tracks and wait for a bit. Clean, fast, relatively painless amputation. Don't these people ever think?

I have to clarify. Homosexuals need not be thrown off cliffs. They should just be not able to birth children. I also have to say that my beliefs assume we are true animals, which we have diverged from and it is considered unacceptable to believe this.

OMG, heterosexuals sometimes have homosexual offspring. The only way we can stop this is to stop people reproducing!

OMG, heterosexuals sometimes have homosexual offspring. The only way we can stop this is to stop people reproducing!

I recommend we identify the gene that makes you gay, and execute any mother who gives there baby it. We test the fetus, and if it tests positive we blast the woman's stomach with a shotgun. This will work excellently, and will have no moral issues whatsoever.

All she had to do was lay on some railroad tracks and wait for a bit. Clean, fast, relatively painless amputation. Don't these people ever think?

She almost did that.

She almost did that.

She should have.

She should have.

And then moved her head forward at the last second. ;)

If she wants to do it, fine. But just the same way that the taxpayer should not pay for a rhinoplasty, if she wants a leg amputation for aesthetic reasons, it should be ENTIRELY on her dime. And there should be a big old "Bitch, please!" stamped onto any application for disability benefits stemming directly from this elective surgery like: handicapped parking, welfare payments, etc.

Where is Legless Pirates when we need him?

If she wants to do it, fine. But just the same way that the taxpayer should not pay for a rhinoplasty, if she wants a leg amputation for aesthetic reasons, it should be ENTIRELY on her dime. And there should be a big old "Bitch, please!" stamped onto any application for disability benefits stemming directly from this elective surgery like: handicapped parking, welfare payments, etc.How is it different from, for example, being born without legs?

Initially I shared your opinion, but as I was typing it, it sort of sank in just how fucked up the woman must be. After all, there doesn't seem to be anything remotely voluntary about her situation.

I think there was an episode on CSI about this, if there wasn't i still remember hearing about this condition.

You do realize that some animals are gay, don't you?

Virtually every amniote species that has had its sexual behavior extensively studied contains homosexuals, and almost always in the same percentage found in humans, or about ten percent. Obviously, a ten percent homosexual population has some beneficial effect, for it to remain against competition from the single biggest selective pressure around. In fact, for it to remain against breeding it has to have a massive benefit.

How is it different from, for example, being born without legs?

Initially I shared your opinion, but as I was typing it, it sort of sank in just how fucked up the woman must be. After all, there doesn't seem to be anything remotely voluntary about her situation.

It is different in the obvious matter of her having been born with working legs, and choosing to remove them.

How then is it that we should then have to pay for the rest of the life for her CHOICE?

If she has no choice, then she is mentally ill and should be treated for it. If she is not mentally ill, then it IS a choice she has no business expecting others to cater to her for.

.... If she is not mentally ill, then it IS a choice she has no business expecting others to cater to her for.

Legs-actly.

Virtually every amniote species that has had its sexual behavior extensively studied contains homosexuals, and almost always in the same percentage found in humans, or about ten percent. Obviously, a ten percent homosexual population has some beneficial effect, for it to remain against competition from the single biggest selective pressure around. In fact, for it to remain against breeding it has to have a massive benefit.

Ten percent? That seems high.

Legs-actly.

Ugh.

It is different in the obvious matter of her having been born with working legs, and choosing to remove them.

How then is it that we should then have to pay for the rest of the life for her CHOICE?

If she has no choice, then she is mentally ill and should be treated for it. If she is not mentally ill, then it IS a choice she has no business expecting others to cater to her for.

Anyone who wants their legs removed IS mentally ill.

Anyone who wants their legs removed IS mentally ill.

Then treat her for that.

However, this post http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12289241&postcount=25 states that she was found mentally competant, in which case it is a choice and should not be foisted on the rest of us.

This lady has a mental condition that makes her want to remove her legs. She tried freezing one off with dry ice twice in order to force doctors to amuptate. She's pretty comitted to going through with this. I think doctors should just go ahead and amputate her legs. It's less dangerous and painful than forcing her to freeze the legs into solid blocks before they'll do the surgery. What do you folks think of this?

http://society.guardian.co.uk/health/story/0,,2000991,00.html

Apparently no one here watches Nip/Tuck. Episode 36, Season 3; a guy named Ben White wanted to have his leg amputated and threatens to "do it himself" with dry ice. He ended up shooting himself in the leg to force the doctors to do the surgery. Same mental "condition."

Apparently no one here watches Nip/Tuck. Episode 36, Season 3; a guy named Ben White wanted to have his leg amputated and threatens to "do it himself" with dry ice. He ended up shooting himself in the leg to force the doctors to do the surgery. Same mental "condition."

Amazingly enough, a fictional television show is not a valid source for medical knowledge.

Amazingly enough, a fictional television show is not a valid source for medical knowledge.

And ironically enough, the fictional television show still accurately portrayed the condition and showed a circumstance eerily similar to the one in the Guardian article.

I'm all for surgeons performing the operation. Just as long as they go through the same process [well, similar] process as a pre-op transgender. They should go through a lenghthy screening process to make sure that's definately what they want and they don't have some other underlying mental disorder.

Not wanting your legs seems to be a serious mental disorder, what are they attacking you in your sleep or maybe they take you places you dont wish to go

Then treat her for that.I don't understand your argument.

What choice does she have? If her life isn't worth living - to the point she's willing to torture & possibly kill herself, despite not having a deathwish, then how can you talk about choice?
It seems about as sensible as calling screamig a choice when someone's pulling your entrails out of your ass, if you'll forgive the crass analogy.

Whether it's sane or not isn't my department, but it's quite obvious the choice you're talking about in this case, is one of unusually gruesome selfmutilation & eventual death, or a severe, pernanent handicap. Given the situation, the sane choice - in my eyes anyway - would be the handicap, and evidently both she & professionals agree.

Yet your argument is that because she doesn't just stick to mutilating herself into an early grave, she doesn't deserve the special treatment we accord people with severe physical handicaps. Special treatment we provide because we all know our societies aren't geared to cater to people with severe physical handicaps.

I hope I just made a strawman or something, I really do.

Not wanting your legs seems to be a serious mental disorder, what are they attacking you in your sleep or maybe they take you places you dont wish to go

Yeah honestly, it's counter-productive and can't be from a sane individual.

Yeah honestly, it's counter-productive and can't be from a sane individual.Hey here's a nifty concept: you let other people be, ad if you're really lucky, they'll let you be as well.

Not everyone has to be like you, or even conprehensible to you. You're not the center of the universe, and regardless of what you think, nobody has to be your fucking clone.

Now I humbly suggest you go kick your dad in the 'nads for failing as a parent.

Hey here's a nifty concept: you let other people be, ad if you're really lucky, they'll let you be as well.

Not everyone has to be like you, or even conprehensible to you. You're not the center of the universe, and regardless of what you think, nobody has to be your fucking clone.

Now I humbly suggest you go kick your dad in the 'nads for failing as a parent.

I never said that and he did fail as a parent... that's why I'm on NS every night instead of with friends or whatever.

I don't understand your argument.

What choice does she have? If her life isn't worth living - to the point she's willing to torture & possibly kill herself, despite not having a deathwish, then how can you talk about choice?
It seems about as sensible as calling screamig a choice when someone's pulling your entrails out of your ass, if you'll forgive the crass analogy.

Whether it's sane or not isn't my department, but it's quite obvious the choice you're talking about in this case, is one of unusually gruesome selfmutilation & eventual death, or a severe, pernanent handicap. Given the situation, the sane choice - in my eyes anyway - would be the handicap, and evidently both she & professionals agree.

Yet your argument is that because she doesn't just stick to mutilating herself into an early grave, she doesn't deserve the special treatment we accord people with severe physical handicaps. Special treatment we provide because we all know our societies aren't geared to cater to people with severe physical handicaps.

I hope I just made a strawman or something, I really do.

So by your reasoning, it's perfectly reasonable to allow her to cut off her own head because she wants to do it, despite the fact that any one of us can see it's harmful to her... we should let her drive spikes into her eyes because she doesn't want to see... and then we should give to her all the benefits we would accord to people who are severely handicapped NOT of their choice, all because her self-mutilation makes her feel whole.

Makes perfect sense to me.

I know. I've never liked my left hand. Seems redundant to me. Why don't I just lop it off so I can get that nifty handicapped tag for my car? I think parking closer to the store in bad weather would be more convenient.

So by your reasoning, it's perfectly reasonable to allow her to cut off her own head because she wants to do it, despite the fact that any one of us can see it's harmful to her... we should let her drive spikes into her eyes because she doesn't want to see... and then we should give to her all the benefits we would accord to people who are severely handicapped NOT of their choice, all because her self-mutilation makes her feel whole.

Makes perfect sense to me.

Were not you the one that said she can chop off her legs if sh wants, which is quite obviously harmful to her?

This is ridiculous. We'll soon be in a society full of cripples, retards, and homosexuals claiming to be normal and being treated as such. Most of them should just be thrown off a cliff. You might say I have no heart, but we euthanized Barbaro and dogs are put down daily. It's called keeping the gene pool clean and pure and not allowing mutations to exist. This isn't eugenics, it's what Nature had intended.

Isn't seeing whether mutations being able to survive on their own merits what nature intended?

I do agree that we're keeping people alive that should be dying, which causes problems.... but I'm not for killing them... it's a hard place to be.

"Nature" meant for us to have mutations, yes.

It also meant for those too weak to survive alone to die.

Which is the problem, one which I am not going to get revolted against trying to fix. But I will go so far as to acknowledge its existence.

And ironically enough, the fictional television show still accurately portrayed the condition and showed a circumstance eerily similar to the one in the Guardian article.

And yet the person in the article doesn't have that condition.

Hey here's a nifty concept: you let other people be, ad if you're really lucky, they'll let you be as well.

Not everyone has to be like you, or even conprehensible to you. You're not the center of the universe, and regardless of what you think, nobody has to be your fucking clone.

Now I humbly suggest you go kick your dad in the 'nads for failing as a parent.

someone a little leg sensitive? Maybe we'll take one of that women's amped legs and put it up your ass? That should kick start that thing call a brain

So by your reasoning, it's perfectly reasonable to allow her to cut off her own head because she wants to do it, despite the fact that any one of us can see it's harmful to her...You're diversifying the debate into oblivion, but sure. I don't have any problems with people killing themselves, assuming they're deemed of sound mind. Being a chainsmoker, there's a good chance I'll end up wanting to kill myself eventually. Hell, you could make the argument that I already am, albeit rather slowly.we should let her drive spikes into her eyes because she doesn't want to see... No, but I get the feeling this is where you & I disagree. I won't simply stand by & watch people mutilate & possibly kill themselves, in an efford to accomplish something we - you, me & the rest of our society - can do in a relatively safe, uncomplicated & painless fashion. But then again, I recognise the justification for us having a society, is to enable eachother to accomplish things more easily than we'd be able to on our own.and then we should give to her all the benefits we would accord to people who are severely handicapped NOT of their choice, all because her self-mutilation makes her feel whole.And this is where I initially was about to agree with you, but then changed my opinion.

Because it's a false dilemma you set up. Apparently this isn't a woman who'd like to one day be a cripple, it's a woman who'll die trying to become a cripple, because it's the only way her life will be tolerable. She's literally torture herself to death in an effort to become crippled, in the absence of other options.

That makes it a no-choice situation. We either decide she's not fit for us helping her to have a normal life - something we can easily do - or we accept that she's a cripple. For there to be choice on her part, we'd first have to buy an ACME Normal-O-Matic ray & ask her if she wouldn't rather have a worthwhile life with legs. Sadly we can't do that.

It boils down to this; if she isn't insane, we can't change her mind & she can't live with legs, then she's just as much a cripple as any other fucking cripple. Whether she deserves any special consideration then comes down to whether or not our society is geared to cope with cripples, which we presumably all agree it isn't. We don't pay cripples for being cripples, after all. If & when we provide them special services, it's to make up having societies unsuited for cripples. Levelling the playing field, as it is.Makes perfect sense to me.Oddly.I know. I've never liked my left hand. Seems redundant to me. Why don't I just lop it off so I can get that nifty handicapped tag for my car? I think parking closer to the store in bad weather would be more convenient.Bollox. But hey, TG me so we can switch identities. I just renewed my insurance last month, so if you lose a hand while pretending to be me, you'll get a nice payoff. Consider it a dare. Because you & I both know you'd hesitate even if your kid's life was at stake.

People simply don't chop themselves to bits for shits & giggles. But even if they did, I'm inclined to say that anyone dedicated enough to lob off their legs just to get the paltry economic benefits we provide other cripples, fucking deserve it. That & a straightjacket.

Isn't seeing whether mutations being able to survive on their own merits what nature intended?

I do agree that we're keeping people alive that should be dying, which causes problems.... but I'm not for killing them... it's a hard place to be.



Which is the problem, one which I am not going to get revolted against trying to fix. But I will go so far as to acknowledge its existence.

Yeah, but it's easier and more "humane" to just get rid of the obvious ones early.

Yeah, but it's easier and more "humane" to just get rid of the obvious ones early.

I feel the urge to point out that your utter lack of concern for anyone besides yourself makes you defective by your own standards.

I feel the urge to point out that your utter lack of concern for anyone besides yourself makes you defective by your own standards.

Humans have become weak and artificial as a species. Babies die. Genes go wrong. In my most radical thoughts I think that even medicine is bad.

Humans have become weak and artificial as a species. Babies die. Genes go wrong. In my most radical thoughts I think that even medicine is bad.

Then don't take any medicine, don't go to the doctor or dentist, and survive on your own.

Then don't take any medicine, don't go to the doctor or dentist, and survive on your own.

For the most part, I don't...and I meant that in a more theoretical sense.