[Previous Months][Date Index][Thread Index][Join - Register][Login]
[Message Prev][Message Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: [IPk] Reason for age given
>2) the child has poorer control. In this case, 10 years or so of poor
>control can lead to irreversible complications. Having experienced exactly
>this phenomenon, I know which option I would choose every time.
>Jeremy claims that 10 years of poor control as a child is unlikely to lead
>to complications. I would disagree strongly here. Think of the number of
>type IIs who have complications because they have had undiagnosed DM for 5
>years or so. There may be a difference due to age, but as far as I know,
>this is yet to be proven, and is not something I would want to risk.
>Secondly, I may be an exception, but I strongly believe that the several
>years I spent as a teenager with poor control strongly
>contributed to my complications, even if they weren't wholly responsible.
I was particularly moved by Gavin's tale of fighting to get decent care for
Melissa... 20 years ago, a child diagnosed with diabetes could reasonably
expect to die of diabetic complications later in life, and their wasn't
much you could do about it except check your toes each night. The advances
in the treatment of complications now means that you can expect to die
*with* complications, rather than *of* complications... which is at least
progress. However, since we now have tools, if still crude, to achieve
near-normal blood glucose levels, and the progression of complications is
closely linked to this, it puts extraordinary pressure and responsibility
on parents, who for the initial years have to control someone elses
diabetes second hand. If that child grows up to develop, say, retinopathy
in their twenties, the parents will surely have to accept some
responsibility for not trying harder when they were in control.
mailto:email @ redacted
for HELP or to subscribe/unsubscribe, contact: HELP@insulin-pumpers.org
help SUPPORT Insulin Pumpers http://www.insulin-pumpers.org/donate.shtml