The Ashley Treatment Can Be Right For Profoundly Disabled Children By Peter Singer

Surgeries can be a controversial topic and often shunned if the patient is not at risk of losing their life. In the written argument, “The ‘Unnatural’ Ashley Treatment Can Be Right for Profoundly Disabled Children,” Peter Singer uses elements of argumentation to professionally back up his statements on the operation. The word argument is used, “to represent forms of discourse that attempt to persuade readers or listeners to accept a position on a controversial issue” (Rottenberg and Winchell 5). To do this not only does he use Aristotelian rhetoric, Rogerian argument, and the Toulmin method to provide a strong case, but also claims of fact and policy. This creates an argument that will tug at the heartstrings while using credible and logical

Before he even begins his argument, he provides a strong reliable background by being a professor of bioethics which studies the ethics of medical and biological research. This gives him a much more trustworthy statement because it shows us readers that he knows what he is talking about and it backs up his arguments since many are emotionally based. First, since he is knowledgeable of this topic, he describes the procedures being done with more detail by stating that, “the uterus removal was intended to spare her discomfort of menstrual cramps; the surgery to prevent the development of breasts aimed to make her more comfortable when she is laying down or had a strap across her chest in her wheelchair” (Singer 23). By explaining all of this he is providing an even more stable and credible background because it shows he is educated on the topic, since he explains what he is articulating about. He starts off his assessment using a claim of fact stating, “five years ago, the parents of a profoundly intellectually disabled girl...known only as Ashley, told the world about a controversial treatment they were using on their child” (Singer 22). This provides a background story of how it all came to be if you were unsure of the information that was about to be told. He then continues on to establish the use of pathos by explaining how, “she was unable to walk, talk, hold a toy, or

When this is used, one must provide a claim for their statement, support it, and then present a warrant, “the warrant is a kind of inference or assumptions which establishes the connection or relevancy between the support part and the claim part” (Argumentation para. 9). His claim here would be that the Ashley treatment should be allowed to be performed on patients because, “there seem to be no grounds for holding the opinion that the treatment was not in Ashley’s best interests,” and in fact it has, “enabled [many] children to live happier lives” (Singer 23). If an operation is allowing a child to live a better life than they normally would not be able to, then Singer is on their side and wants them to be able to live comfortably. His support is the effect it has on their families and how it allows them to, “lift and move them, so that they can care for them at home” (Singer 23). When looking at the positives and negatives of this procedure, he displays how this treatment greatly assists families and it is not being used in cases other than these. This is also use of logos, or logic, because he wants you to think for yourself and realize that nothing is wrong with using this treatment on those who would greatly benefit from it. His warrant is his agreement that a procedure like this should be approved by a doctor and, “used only on the most profoundly intellectually disabled patients” (Singer 23).