Jump to content

Why change a Historic association?

Thai Bry

Recommended Posts

I'm deeply aware of the sadness of the death of baby "Hope", one of the twins recently born, and also of the sadness to the immediate family - and in no way is this question meant to demean the situation.

I've seen & heard in the news of  of the words " co-joined twins".

It used to be known as "Siamese Twins" - due to the very first occurance of this ever happening. The original "Twins" lived to an old age and farthered many children between them.

Why has this association been changed to "Co-joined twins".?

Sorry if I've offended anyone with my seemily inappropriate timing of my question.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

But how long before 'Downs' becomes derogatory for those sad people out there who delight in others misfortunes.(hope thats the right word as I know parents with handicapped children who have counted them as a blessing from day one.)

Supprised the operation was carried out so soon after their birth and was under the impression that cases like this are always given time to gain the strength for such things, but lets hope the surviving twin pulls through as is so often the case.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Howie, I think because of the problem with their stomach they had no choice but to operate, they couldn't wait for a better, safer, time.


Siamese twins, I believe it is now referred to as co-joined for various reasons:


- the racial stereo-type

- the name 'Siamese twins' suggests to many who are aware of the 'famous' Siamese twins, that twins of this type are joined in the same way, ie at the trunk, twins who are are joined at the hip, head, etc, don't easily fall into this 'category', therefore co-joined is more accurate and appropriately covers a wider spectrum of types of 'joining'.


From what I recall about the 'famous' Siamese twins, their being joined wasn't a major health problem, in that it was only soft tissue etc that was actually joined, I don't believe any organs etc were involved. In fact, if they were alive today I think they could have been separated relatively easily by comparison with what these two babies have had to endure.


Whatever you want to call their 'condition', it is a very sad thing indeed for babies to be born this way with the unfortunately risks to their lives. It is not uncommon, as is the situation with these 2 babies, for their to be other major complications as well such as heart defects. Who remembers the Irish twins who shared 1 pelvis and 1 legs between them quite a few years ago? They were separated as toddlers but unfortunately one died due to a heart condition, if they hadn't operated to separate them, both would have died. It's very sad, however you look at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep! however you dress up the wording (descriptive as it once was with no malace - Mongol (downs) Siamese (con-joined) or descriptive as our PC Stassi would rather us use) - the terminology is still "Descriptive" - but just for our society now, not the one that existed in the past.


Whatever you call it still a very sad tragedy.


Let's wish them well.


Both of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This very sad story is all over our local paper as the family are all from Shrewsbury.

Hope and Faith had to undergo the operation to seperate them as they deteriated rapidly over the first 24hrs of their lives, and the remaining twin is not out of the woods yet as her lungs are not stronge enough so fingers crossed for every day she manages....


You can't help but feel thank god its not me or mine, selfish I know but all the same..........

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Create New...