Author Topic: GB wheelchair basketball player says he may consider amputation option  (Read 82 times)

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39723
Struggling with this - obviously what is disabled is a question that needs to be defined for disabled sport and in some senses any line drawn is in some sense arbitrary but the idea that someone would have the amputation to allow them to continue in the sport rather than as treatment for the condition is very troubling to me for reasons that I'm struggling to understand

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/disability-sport/53581943
« Last Edit: July 30, 2020, 11:55:19 AM by Nearly Sane »

The Suppository of Norman Wisdom

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27010
  • CHOOSE DETERMINISM !
Struggling with this - obviously what is disabled is a question that needs to be defined for disabled sport and in some senses any line drawn is in some sense arbitrary but the idea that someone would have the amputation to allow them to continue in the sport rater than as treatment for the condition is very troubling to me for reasons that I'm struggling to understand

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/disability-sport/53581943
Thank you for flagging this up. I too find this hard to accept.
I think unlike you I am putting very little onus on my failure to understand rather than think this is fucking wrong at so many levels.
CHOOSE DETERMINISM !

The Suppository of Norman Wisdom

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27010
  • CHOOSE DETERMINISM !
Maybe he should be allowed as long as he carries out the operation himself.
CHOOSE DETERMINISM !

Wilkins Micawber

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5194
The IPC's decision is bloody outrageous.
There's a Starmer, waiting in the wings...
My poems.  https://www.facebook.com/alittlewise/

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39723
The IPC's decision is bloody outrageous.
Why?

Outrider

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12537
It's a tough area - how much a given condition impairs someone, and in what ways, is an inherently subjective area.  I can see the argument that, whilst persistent pain is emotionally and psychologically debilitating it's not necessarily physically restrictive directly...

Wherever the line is drawn someone is going to be straddling it.

I'd like to think that there aren't health providers in the UK who'd comply with the operation for non-medical reason, but... there are private providers that probably would (I occasionally work in that sector, and profit is all for some of them), there are providers outside of the UK who have less-stringent regulatory regimes to comply with, and then there are undoubtedly psychiatric providers who'd argue that his mental quality of life is improved by his competing at elite level to the extent that the physical loss of a leg is the less impactful way forward... and as a non-expert it's difficult to be definitive that they'd be wrong, despite my instinct that it probably is.

O.
Universes are forever, not just for creation...

New Atheism - because, apparently, there's a use-by date on unanswered questions.

Eminent Pedant, Interpreter of Heretical Writings, Unwarranted Harvester of Trite Nomenclature, Church of Debatable Saints

Wilkins Micawber

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5194
Why?
Because he is obviously disabled.
There's a Starmer, waiting in the wings...
My poems.  https://www.facebook.com/alittlewise/

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39723
It's a tough area - how much a given condition impairs someone, and in what ways, is an inherently subjective area.  I can see the argument that, whilst persistent pain is emotionally and psychologically debilitating it's not necessarily physically restrictive directly...

Wherever the line is drawn someone is going to be straddling it.

I'd like to think that there aren't health providers in the UK who'd comply with the operation for non-medical reason, but... there are private providers that probably would (I occasionally work in that sector, and profit is all for some of them), there are providers outside of the UK who have less-stringent regulatory regimes to comply with, and then there are undoubtedly psychiatric providers who'd argue that his mental quality of life is improved by his competing at elite level to the extent that the physical loss of a leg is the less impactful way forward... and as a non-expert it's difficult to be definitive that they'd be wrong, despite my instinct that it probably is.

O.
From the article suggesting that he chose not to have amputation as a teenager, I assume that it will deal with some of the condition, and that he could in theory chose to have that amputation at any time based on that, It's that which I'm finding difficult to argue against - despite me not liking the idea that the actual determining factor is the continuing in the sport.

Nearly Sane

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 39723
Because he is obviously disabled.
And they are not saying he isn't. It's just that they are trying to get a level playing field for this in the sport, and some disabilities may be substantially less severe than others.

Outrider

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12537
Because he is obviously disabled.

My two eldest children are both disabled, one slightly one profoundly, and yet neither of them has ever been eligible for the paralympics; there are entire categories of disability that are not represented (some rightly, some arguable not).

O.
Universes are forever, not just for creation...

New Atheism - because, apparently, there's a use-by date on unanswered questions.

Eminent Pedant, Interpreter of Heretical Writings, Unwarranted Harvester of Trite Nomenclature, Church of Debatable Saints