Baby Girl That Doesn'T Age

[BoTox]

I read an article today about a girl that is 16 years old that still has her baby teeth and doesn't talk. One would only assume she has been in diapers all her life. Which is not the interesting part, but the fact that she may never acquire an adult body is a dream for some here. It may even provide the information needed to turn off the aging gene!

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Health/Story?id=7880954&page=1

[PampersPete]

Let's hope she's not exploited.

[Knuxie Fawks]

I've already posted a topic about this. http://www.dailydiapers.com/board/index.php?showtopic=16939

[babyvr6]

^ good for you.

[Honeywell6180]

Imagine being that size, with a cognitive ability so severely limited you can barely bath and feed yourself. People wonder behind your back who's turn it is to clean you up next. And then without quite realizing, you're looked at as a freak when your true age dawns on someone besides your parents or people in your close network. Your thoughts and views bear no importance to anybody and you have no dignity or respect; almost like you were another species. Someone's pet, perhaps. And later in life, when your parents are too old to care for you, you end up in some nursing home or assisted living facility because you're too old to be in the foster care system. Everything is left to the probate judge, even the "quality of life" decisions that could mean the difference between life and death.

It's hard for me to imagine never being able to drive a car. Or navigate my own environment. Or, being at the mercy of someone else while the parents are off doing their own thing. Or, heaven forbid, being unknowingly exploited by someone else for their own gain. Well, gee. I don't know I'd really want to be in her shoes. I guess I'm just an old codger who lives independently and likes to make his own decisions.

Honeywell6180

[Honeywell6180]

There is one other thing: I wouldn't want to spend 65% of my life in a hospital. Nor would I want the feeding tube.

Honeywell6180

[waynecook52]

I read an article today about a girl that is 16 years old that still has her baby teeth and doesn't talk. One would only assume she has been in diapers all her life. Which is not the interesting part, but the fact that she may never acquire an adult body is a dream for some here. It may even provide the information needed to turn off the aging gene!

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Health/Story?id=7880954&page=1

I saw the show on tlc you all talking about.This girl is allso handiecaped mentaly so she has no real knowalage of most of the things around her.So if this is what some of you want god help ya

[Knuxie Fawks]

^ good for you.

Guess that's the last topic I start...

[BoTox]

I was actually more interested in them being able to turn off the aging gene. I'd like to have stayed 30 for a while longer although 40's don't seem much worse. I actually have enough money to do most of what I want when I want instead of having to scrimp for a bag of mail order diapers.

[Aleia]

This story is just haunting.

Not that I can possibly imagine what it must be like for Brooke's family, and I can tell they love her very much and are trying to give her the best life possible, but I resent the way they view and treat her as a perpetual baby, dressing her in babyish clothes, deliberately trying to make strangers believe she's a baby, and so forth. This is a real teenager with a disability, not a sixteen-year-old toddler. There is no such thing as "trapped in time"--that's ridiculous. Brooke's body and mind have failed to develop properly, but that doesn't mean she hasn't aged. Even people with the mental abilities of a two-year-old have memories, knowledge and wisdom, and the value of these shouldn't be downplayed just because of the misleading idea of mental age.

Why can't they let her wear age-appropriate (albeit specially-made) clothes, push her in a wheelchair instead of a stroller, and not wallpaper her entire life with kiddie cartoon designs? If she were severely mentally retarded but physically typical, they wouldn't treat her like a baby. Why should that change just because of her size?

[Knuxie Fawks]

This story is just haunting.

Not that I can possibly imagine what it must be like for Brooke's family, and I can tell they love her very much and are trying to give her the best life possible, but I resent the way they view and treat her as a perpetual baby, dressing her in babyish clothes, deliberately trying to make strangers believe she's a baby, and so forth. This is a real teenager with a disability, not a sixteen-year-old toddler. There is no such thing as "trapped in time"--that's ridiculous. Brooke's body and mind have failed to develop properly, but that doesn't mean she hasn't aged. Even people with the mental abilities of a two-year-old have memories, knowledge and wisdom, and the value of these shouldn't be downplayed just because of the misleading idea of mental age.

Why can't they let her wear age-appropriate (albeit specially-made) clothes, push her in a wheelchair instead of a stroller, and not wallpaper her entire life with kiddie cartoon designs? If she were severely mentally retarded but physically typical, they wouldn't treat her like a baby. Why should that change just because of her size?

Think about the forum of people you're talking to. I think anyone here would love to be coddled and pampered and given the kind of love only infants receive for their entire life. In a way, I think she's more of a contribution to society and the human race in general than your average 16 year old. Her family obviously loves her, and from what they've said, she likes shopping and probably picked those clothes herself.

But back to how she's contributing... In a way, she has a job. She holds the secrets of longevity within her. She will provide more scientific discoveries than any normal adult possibly could. Her dad says she's the fountain of youth, and she may very well be the key to discovering through scientific means how to increase the longevity and quality of life. However, due to this miracle/defect, she may not live a long life like many of us will. She is a phenomenon that may lead to new discoveries that were before impossible.

[lil_baby_wet_n_squishy]

This story is just haunting.

Not that I can possibly imagine what it must be like for Brooke's family, and I can tell they love her very much and are trying to give her the best life possible, but I resent the way they view and treat her as a perpetual baby, dressing her in babyish clothes, deliberately trying to make strangers believe she's a baby, and so forth. This is a real teenager with a disability, not a sixteen-year-old toddler. There is no such thing as "trapped in time"--that's ridiculous. Brooke's body and mind have failed to develop properly, but that doesn't mean she hasn't aged. Even people with the mental abilities of a two-year-old have memories, knowledge and wisdom, and the value of these shouldn't be downplayed just because of the misleading idea of mental age.

Why can't they let her wear age-appropriate (albeit specially-made) clothes, push her in a wheelchair instead of a stroller, and not wallpaper her entire life with kiddie cartoon designs? If she were severely mentally retarded but physically typical, they wouldn't treat her like a baby. Why should that change just because of her size?

Did you even watch the show on TLC?

[Leilin]

This story is just haunting.

Not that I can possibly imagine what it must be like for Brooke's family, and I can tell they love her very much and are trying to give her the best life possible, but I resent the way they view and treat her as a perpetual baby, dressing her in babyish clothes, deliberately trying to make strangers believe she's a baby, and so forth. This is a real teenager with a disability, not a sixteen-year-old toddler. There is no such thing as "trapped in time"--that's ridiculous. Brooke's body and mind have failed to develop properly, but that doesn't mean she hasn't aged. Even people with the mental abilities of a two-year-old have memories, knowledge and wisdom, and the value of these shouldn't be downplayed just because of the misleading idea of mental age.

Why can't they let her wear age-appropriate (albeit specially-made) clothes, push her in a wheelchair instead of a stroller, and not wallpaper her entire life with kiddie cartoon designs? If she were severely mentally retarded but physically typical, they wouldn't treat her like a baby. Why should that change just because of her size?

Ah... it's not just her size that's stunted. She has the intellectual capacity of an infant, too. There is nothing "letting her" or not letting her wear the clothes. For all intents and purposes, she is a perpetual baby. Forcing her to wear some sick approximation of teenage clothing (what? A thong diaper?) would be more cruel, as her condition is not apparent now in public and making it some spectacle for all to see would just be salt on the wound for the family itself, whereas the infant will probably not care, as it retains the attention span of an infant. She will never have bladder or bowel control, full linguistic capacity, children, a first date, a prom, a husband, or even a first boyfriend.

You seem to have jumped to an incorrect conclusion or two in your post. Yes, this is somewhat tragic and envying her position is slightly... um... not healthy, considering that whatever is happening to her, it is causing different parts of her body to age at different rates. However, her parents are not humiliating her or anything like that by dressing her the way they do. They are simply coping with the situation, that being a daughter who is perpetually trapped in infancy, to the best of their abilities.

There aren't very many memories to worry about, really. Infants process them very, very slowly. This child stopped aging before she even had a fully developed prefrontal lobe, crazy as that may seem. There is not enough language processing to form words and not enough to attach full meaning to the ones that are formed.

But yes, it is a pitiable condition.

And, yes, all of this was said in the first thread that Knuxie created on the subject. Credit to you, Knux!

[Aleia]

The parents may be disguising Brooke as a baby to protect her from people's attention and curiosity. The fact that they've been putting her in national news and TV documentaries under provocative language like "Child Frozen in Time" seems to tell a slightly different story, though.

Yes, I do realize she has the mental capacity of an infant. I said so many times in my post. But so do lots of physically normal but profoundly mentally disabled sixteen-year-olds, and while they require a lot of the same care as infants do, no one regards them as being infants. They aren't dressed in cutesy outfits, placed in bassinets and so forth. In fact, in a lot of professional settings, disrespecting a disabled adult's chronological age could get you in a lot of trouble. You're supposed to refer to them as Mr. or Ms. and speak to them in your normal voice (no baby-talk). The difference between Brooke and other teens with mental retardation is that her condition has drastically affected her physical development as well as her mental development.

The notion of being "frozen in time" is nothing but cheap sensationalism. Unless Brooke's body can defy the laws of physics, she does not contain the key to "eternal youth"--when she gets old (God willing), age will take its toll on her body just as it does for the rest of us. Her bones and muscles will weaken, her skin will sag, and her senses will lose acuity from years of wear and tear.

I'm not saying the parents should dress her like a hooker and make her date boys, learn algebra and take care of herself. But they ought to give her a chance to flourish in the abilities she does have, simple as they may be, and they shouldn't force her to hide her true self in their own shame or fear. It's good that they're sending her to special school (although I sure hope she doesn't have to come to school in baby clothes). Seriously regarding and treating her as some magical "eternal baby" slams a lot of doors for her.

[Leilin]

The parents may be disguising Brooke as a baby to protect her from people's attention and curiosity. The fact that they've been putting her in national news and TV documentaries under provocative language like "Child Frozen in Time" seems to tell a slightly different story, though.

Yes, I do realize she has the mental capacity of an infant. I said so many times in my post. But so do lots of physically normal but profoundly mentally disabled sixteen-year-olds, and while they require a lot of the same care as infants do, no one regards them as being infants. They aren't dressed in cutesy outfits, placed in bassinets and so forth. In fact, in a lot of professional settings, disrespecting a disabled adult's chronological age could get you in a lot of trouble. You're supposed to refer to them as Mr. or Ms. and speak to them in your normal voice (no baby-talk). The difference between Brooke and other teens with mental retardation is that her condition has drastically affected her physical development as well as her mental development.

The notion of being "frozen in time" is nothing but cheap sensationalism. Unless Brooke's body can defy the laws of physics, she does not contain the key to "eternal youth"--when she gets old (God willing), age will take its toll on her body just as it does for the rest of us. Her bones and muscles will weaken, her skin will sag, and her senses will lose acuity from years of wear and tear.

I'm not saying the parents should dress her like a hooker and make her date boys, learn algebra and take care of herself. But they ought to give her a chance to flourish in the abilities she does have, simple as they may be, and they shouldn't force her to hide her true self in their own shame or fear. It's good that they're sending her to special school (although I sure hope she doesn't have to come to school in baby clothes). Seriously regarding and treating her as some magical "eternal baby" slams a lot of doors for her.

Let's work this the other way.

The only sign of her age, as of yet, the only sign, externally or mentally, is the number. Period. End of story. She can't understand language any more than your average one or two year old (a little bit, in other words). By what other rubric is she "not a baby"? I'd say none. She is a baby. She's just an older baby.

Let's also keep in mind that the parents were probably paid for the article (and it probably helped with the child's obviously daunting medical bills), and that it doesn't necessarily reflect their opinions or even the current state of the child's life.

The thing is that "slamming doors" would be working under the assumption that doors are opening. They aren't and show no sign of doing so. She has the physical and mental capabilities as an infant despite the fact that she is nearly a legal adult. She'll never have a job, for example, and she will very, very likely die young, as most people with dwarfism do. Isn't it the best the parents can do to make her life pleasant within the ways that they know how?

All of this use of the terms "forcing" and "force" would imply that there is an effort by the child to do otherwise. Have you seen sign of that? I certainly haven't.

[Nat]

The parents may be disguising Brooke as a baby to protect her from people's attention and curiosity. The fact that they've been putting her in national news and TV documentaries under provocative language like "Child Frozen in Time" seems to tell a slightly different story, though.

Yes, I do realize she has the mental capacity of an infant. I said so many times in my post. But so do lots of physically normal but profoundly mentally disabled sixteen-year-olds, and while they require a lot of the same care as infants do, no one regards them as being infants. They aren't dressed in cutesy outfits, placed in bassinets and so forth. In fact, in a lot of professional settings, disrespecting a disabled adult's chronological age could get you in a lot of trouble. You're supposed to refer to them as Mr. or Ms. and speak to them in your normal voice (no baby-talk). The difference between Brooke and other teens with mental retardation is that her condition has drastically affected her physical development as well as her mental development.

The notion of being "frozen in time" is nothing but cheap sensationalism. Unless Brooke's body can defy the laws of physics, she does not contain the key to "eternal youth"--when she gets old (God willing), age will take its toll on her body just as it does for the rest of us. Her bones and muscles will weaken, her skin will sag, and her senses will lose acuity from years of wear and tear.

I'm not saying the parents should dress her like a hooker and make her date boys, learn algebra and take care of herself. But they ought to give her a chance to flourish in the abilities she does have, simple as they may be, and they shouldn't force her to hide her true self in their own shame or fear. It's good that they're sending her to special school (although I sure hope she doesn't have to come to school in baby clothes). Seriously regarding and treating her as some magical "eternal baby" slams a lot of doors for her.

But all those disabled 16 year olds who have minds of infants or toddlers look like 16 year olds than a baby. There is a difference. It's easier to dress Brooke in baby clothes than paying money to have clothes special made for her and baby cribs are cheaper than bigger cribs for handicapped people, strollers are cheaper than a wheel chair and so is a baby car seat than a special needs one, and they find using a high chair easier than feeding her on the ground or in the chair. If she were size of a 16 year old, she would still get a car seat and a crib but they be much bigger and they need to use a van and she be in a a wheel chair and be fed in her chair and pushed around in it. She would also wear regular clothes too like everyone else. Plus she is easy to take care of because they can easily pick her up and carry her around, bath her, dress her, change her, and it's much harder to change someone who is the size of an adult and harder to dress them and pick them up. I think men be tougher because they are stronger but women be easier because men can easily pick a woman up so they be suitable caregivers to a disabled woman. But I wonder how disabled men are taken care of. I figure a bunch of people pick them up from their bed to wheel chair to bath from chair. And how you change disabled people, you put the diaper beside them and roll their body on it. You also roll their body off their used diaper when you change them.

So Brooke and other disabled people who have minds of a baby are two different things because Brooke is a size of a 1 year old and other disabled teens and adults are not. Why does everyone keep saying infant if she doesn't even look like an infant? She looks one.

I guess people can't see her as a 16 year old because she doesn't look 16 and she looks one so they treat her like a one year old. I don't know if people do baby talk to her or cutesy talk. But I do know people do cutesy talk to disabled people, rather they are in wheelchairs or not and I know some of them don't like it. I am sure people with MR don't like it either. Heck even children don't like being talked to in a cutesy voice. You talk to them in your normal tone of voice. But babies on the other hand like it because they smile.