A recent documentary on the two year old Indian girl born with an extra set of arms and legs due to a parasitic twin follows the child and her family from her transformation from “goddess” to normal child. The little girl’s family and the village she lived in revered her as the reincarnation of a goddess and as such she brought attention and tourism which provided for her family and helped the community prosper. However, her condition was such that she would not have survived beyond her teens without intervention.
The Hump Day Hmm invites us to ponder the idea of when to leave well enough alone. Do all things “not normal” truly need fixing?
Perhaps it is because I am not feeling well as I write this but I have no opinion on this topic. I question the idea of normal and norms anyway. Nothing/no one could possibly survive too much scrutiny or measurement to fit the one size should fit all theory under which we live.
In the case of the goddess girl should her welfare have been put aside in favor of the continued benefits her condition brought to her family and village? Clearly the answer is no. She was already suffering the ill effects and would have continued to decline health wise. It would have been irresponsible of her parents not to take action. And perhaps their daughter’s job was done. For two years she brought joy and prosperity into their lives and the lives of others. A huge task for one so tiny. Maybe it was her turn. Maybe being “normal” was her reward.
anniegirl1138 
I had mixed feelings about this as well. I think that her family and village loved her not just because of her 8 limbs, but because she is a beautiful child with a radiant smile. But I may be seeing “the best” in people. In then end, it was definitely in her best interest to be operated because of health issues in the future. I’m a week late for the Hmm, but check out my post here:
http://www.mommybytes.com/2008/07/autism-revealed.html
It’s hard to have an overall opinion. In truth, it’s a case by case, isn’t it?
I am equal parts understanding my friend who simply helps her autistic son adapt, and equal parts understanding my friend who strives to find The Thing that will help relieve her son of his autism.
How can this be? Case by case I suppose, not my case, I suppose.
I think my real question is how do we weigh individual versus greater good and how do we determine action versus adaptation?
But I like your thought: perhaps her job was done.
I think it’s hard to know when medicine has gone too far and when we should just leave well enough enough. Issues about cloning come to mind. It’s a difficult judgment to make (not this particular case, but in general). It’s good to ask ourselves these questions.
I agree with you that normal would be such a reward in this case. The whole thing causes you to stop and think a bit though.
I find it interesting that we knock ourselves out trying to accomplish normal for our children here in the US when in other cultures the abnormal is celebrated.
I always think “normal” depends on who you are.
Just look at my family growing up for a great example.