Growth Attenuation Therapy: Ongoing Ethical and Practical Challenges 20 Years Post Ashley.

Stephen D Brown,Kerri O Kennedy,Faye F Holder-Niles,Irina A Anselm,Brian D Snyder,David Fogelman,Margaret F Kirber,Gal Kober,Ingrid Holm,Jonathan M Marron
{"title":"Growth Attenuation Therapy: Ongoing Ethical and Practical Challenges 20 Years Post Ashley.","authors":"Stephen D Brown,Kerri O Kennedy,Faye F Holder-Niles,Irina A Anselm,Brian D Snyder,David Fogelman,Margaret F Kirber,Gal Kober,Ingrid Holm,Jonathan M Marron","doi":"10.1080/15265161.2025.2497982","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since publication of the \"Ashley Case\" in 2006, few rigorous clinical or research reports have elucidated the benefits, risks, outcomes, and experiences of children with severe neurodevelopmental disorders treated with Growth Attenuation Therapy (GAT). GAT remains available, however, with at least one institution publicly discussing its ongoing program. This paper describes ethics consultations provided for two separate GAT requests (hormonal treatment only) at one institution, both from parents who independently learned of the treatment elsewhere. We detail these comprehensive consultations, and subsequent multistakeholder deliberations undertaken to determine whether formal consultations should be required for similar future cases. We offer insights regarding processes for future potential candidates, including for addressing questions such as: Should all clinically similar children be offered GAT proactively or only upon parental request? What are the implications for access/equity? We call for further peer-reviewed scholarship to reanimate this historically stigmatized and understudied treatment.","PeriodicalId":501008,"journal":{"name":"The American Journal of Bioethics","volume":"34 1","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The American Journal of Bioethics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2025.2497982","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Since publication of the "Ashley Case" in 2006, few rigorous clinical or research reports have elucidated the benefits, risks, outcomes, and experiences of children with severe neurodevelopmental disorders treated with Growth Attenuation Therapy (GAT). GAT remains available, however, with at least one institution publicly discussing its ongoing program. This paper describes ethics consultations provided for two separate GAT requests (hormonal treatment only) at one institution, both from parents who independently learned of the treatment elsewhere. We detail these comprehensive consultations, and subsequent multistakeholder deliberations undertaken to determine whether formal consultations should be required for similar future cases. We offer insights regarding processes for future potential candidates, including for addressing questions such as: Should all clinically similar children be offered GAT proactively or only upon parental request? What are the implications for access/equity? We call for further peer-reviewed scholarship to reanimate this historically stigmatized and understudied treatment.
生长衰减疗法:阿什利20年后持续的伦理和实践挑战。
自2006年“Ashley病例”发表以来,很少有严谨的临床或研究报告阐明使用生长衰减疗法(Growth Attenuation Therapy, GAT)治疗严重神经发育障碍儿童的益处、风险、结果和经验。然而,GAT仍然可用,至少有一个机构公开讨论其正在进行的计划。本文描述了在一个机构为两个单独的GAT请求(仅激素治疗)提供的伦理咨询,这两个请求都来自于在其他地方独立了解到治疗的父母。我们详细介绍了这些全面的磋商,以及随后进行的多利益相关者审议,以确定是否需要就类似的未来案例进行正式磋商。我们提供了关于未来潜在候选人流程的见解,包括解决以下问题:所有临床相似的儿童是否应主动或仅应父母要求提供GAT ?这对获取/公平有什么影响?我们呼吁进一步开展同行评审的学术研究,以重振这种历史上被污名化和研究不足的治疗方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信