SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
On December 9 2008, 45-year-old Connie Culp became the first person in the United States, and only the fourth in the world, to receive a face transplant. Connie's transplant took a team at the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio more than 22 hours to perform and allowed her to eat solid food again, to smell, and to breathe independently. Four years earlier, Connie had been shot in the face by her husband, who was subsequently imprisoned for seven years for aggravated attempted murder. Sadly, Connie died on July 29 2020, of an as yet unspecified infection.
[...] Understanding the psychological effects of living with visible facial difference, as well as a new face, is very important. Every surgical solution has emotional consequences, which are less documented than physical results. This reflects the context in which face transplants take place. Scientific medicine tends to focus on physical rather than mental measurements, and on the immediate "before and after" rather than the prolonged, complex work of psychological healing.
Surgical teams around the world are beginning to assess the quality of life outcomes of face transplants, but progress is slow. International comparisons are difficult to make, even in physical terms. Nine face transplant patients have died, and two faces have been rejected, but there are few examples of long term, holistic follow-up. Given Connie's work in raising public awareness of the impact of living with facial difference, there will be no more appropriate legacy than a better understanding of the benefits and limitations of face transplants.
The psychological wounds of the procedure may be harder to heal than the physical ones.
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Wednesday August 19 2020, @04:09PM (2 children)
Conflating rape and murder / being shot in the face, classy.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 5, Insightful) by DannyB on Wednesday August 19 2020, @05:40PM (1 child)
<no-sarcasm>
When I read it, I didn't see conflating the two.
First I saw the stupidity and ignorance of the original statements. Then I saw the same stupidity if you substituted being shot in the face, in each statement.
Not all will agree, but I see the people who said those things [snopes.com] as defective people. Others will defend what they said. Why wouldn't such humanity-challenged individuals also trivialize being shot in the face as easily as they excuse rape or murder.
</no-sarcasm>
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 1) by anubi on Wednesday August 19 2020, @11:13PM
Agree. I considered our parent post as demonstrating the fallacies of both paradigms. Actually, I found it to be an interesting comparison, and also a reminder that the legal profession can be quite trying.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]