From: Mike Lorrey (mlorrey@datamann.com)
Date: Tue Mar 19 2002 - 09:13:43 MST
$6cd23e44@huntsv01.al.comcast.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Louis Newstrom wrote:
>
> From: "Samantha Atkins" <samantha@objectent.com>
>
> > Your response doesn't seem to be quite what is going on
> ...
> > If doctors were being regulated to only necessary surgery
> > then liposuction and plastic surgery would not be performed for
> > as many reasons
>
> I don't think the mindset is that surgery is "necessary" if it restores what
> is considered "normal". Liposuction and plastic surgery are done to
> "restore" a person to normal-ness. Plastic surgery started by correcting
> gross deformities. After a while, even a millimeter imperfection was
> allowed to be corrected. I suspect that a plastic surgeon who gave someone
> three eyes or pointed ears would be frowned upon, maybe even have their
> license revoked.
There are individuals, some of whom Natasha can clue you in on, who have
gotten legitimate doctors to do such surgeries: implants in the scalp
that appear as nascent 'demon horns', grinding and augmenting teeth to
appear more canine/feline or vampire-like. Furthermore, the whole breast
implant trend does more than just 'restore normalness' when 16 year old
girls are asking for Pamela Anderson type breats.
Of course, the good old boys in congress are all for breasts, so that
sort of above average augmentation sneaks on by. They also seem to be
for letting men have larger penises as well.
All of this, though is in the area of appearance, cosmetic surgery. It's
only when the surgery applies to improving something beyond mere
appearance and above the average that the 'ethicists' heads start to pay
attention (though a larger penis is certainly pushing the envelop...).
Improving the performance of things which 'really matter' like brain
function, eyesight, hearing, and sporting competetiveness are all areas
where augmentation above the norm is considered unethical.
As I've said before, the way to overcome this resistance by ethicists
will require that we help improve augmentations for the handicapped so
that the performance they acquire with augmentation is far above that of
normal people. When that occurs, normals can then sue to have these
outmoded ethical constraints removed because of democratic
considerations of equal protection: normals should have the same right
to a higher than normal level of performance that the handicapped enjoy.
Without such a development, it is normals who then become the real
'handicapped'.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:13:01 MST