A happy mom recently told the story of how her little girl said goodbye to a birthmark on her forehead, even though they initially faced some criticism from doctors.
A very uncommon birthmark.
© viennarosebrookshaw / Instagram, © viennarosebrookshaw / Instagram, © viennarosebrookshaw / Instagram
Here’s the story of Celine Casey and her two-year-old daughter, Vienna Shaw. Vienna was born with a rare birthmark called congenital melanocytic nevus (CMN) on her forehead, which only occurs in one out of every 20,000 newborns.
When Celine learned about the birthmark, she felt worried and wondered if she had done something wrong during her pregnancy. She didn’t know what the birthmark would mean for Vienna but was determined to remove it so that her daughter could grow up without feeling different.
© viennarosebrookshaw / Instagram
Even though the birthmark didn’t affect Brookshaw’s physical health, Casey knew it could impact her daughter’s mental well-being as she grew older and interacted with other children who might be curious about her condition.
Celine shared that the family sometimes used to hide Vienna’s birthmark by covering her face when they went out. She said, “We went out daily with her and got a few stares.”
The surgery was challenging.
© viennarosebrookshaw / Instagram
When they sought help from the NHS, the family received disheartening feedback. Doctors couldn’t go ahead with the surgery to remove the birthmark, categorizing it as a cosmetic procedure.
However, the parents viewed it differently. They were genuinely worried about potential teasing from other kids, which could affect their daughter’s mental well-being at a young age. Casey was also concerned that if they didn’t remove the birthmark, her daughter might grow to resent her and her partner.
© viennarosebrookshaw / Instagram, © viennarosebrookshaw / Instagram, © viennarosebrookshaw / Instagram
The parents took matters into their own hands and privately raised the required funds. Through crowdfunding, they managed to gather $52,000 within 24 hours. However, due to increased hospital costs in 2020, they had to raise an additional $27,000. With a new funding request, they eventually reached their goal.
They encountered difficulties with doctors.
© viennarosebrookshaw / Instagram
Disagreements between the medical team and the parents have led to differing opinions. Vienna’s parents wanted the birthmark removed through surgery, but the surgeon refused to perform the procedure. The surgeon’s stance is rooted in the belief that the child should make the decision once she reaches an appropriate age.
After this controversy arose, Daniel Brookshaw, Vienna’s father, expressed his dissatisfaction with the doctor’s viewpoint. The doctor also consulted with a dermatologist who concurred with the surgeon, emphasizing that the birthmark doesn’t threaten Vienna’s health and is not cancerous.
The surgery was completed successfully.
© viennarosebrookshaw / Instagram
Vienna is now two years old, and her doctors have successfully removed her birthmark, leaving only a faint scar between her eyebrows. Casey regularly shares updates on Shaw’s scar and recovery process on her social media, and followers often comment on how beautiful her little girl looks.
Despite the birthmark being gone, Casey mentioned that they still have to travel between cities to check the healing of the scar and see if any additional procedures are needed beyond the three she has already undergone. Shaw is now enjoying the typical life of a two-year-old.
© viennarosebrookshaw / Instagram
This little girl’s case with her birthmark brings attention to the delicate balance between parental advocacy and a child’s autonomy in medical decisions. While her parents aimed to secure her social acceptance and well-being, medical professionals stressed the importance of respecting Vienna’s future autonomy over her own body.
This story serves as a reminder of the intricate ethical considerations that arise when navigating the boundaries of parental authority and individual autonomy, prompting broader reflections on the rights of minors in the medical realm.
King Charles Reveals His First Official Portrait, and People Are Terrified
In a much-anticipated reveal, King Charles III’s first official portrait since becoming king has sparked widespread conversation. Public reactions and critics’ opinions are far from mild, igniting lively debates on social media and among art enthusiasts. It’s evident that King Charles’ portrait is poised to be one of the most discussed royal artworks in recent memory.
Revealing the artwork
Recently, King Charles III revealed a new portrait of himself at Buckingham Palace, marking the first since his coronation. The Royal Family’s Instagram account posted an exclusive video showing the king presenting the artwork.
This notable portrait will eventually be showcased at Drapers’ Hall in London, joining its esteemed art collection and providing the public with a chance to see the monarch’s regal image.
The comments section quickly became a hotbed of debate.
The unveiling ignited a heated debate in the comments on the Royal Family’s Instagram post and other social media platforms. Opinions were sharply divided, with some users harshly criticizing the portrait. Comments included, “I would be very upset and offended if this was my royal portrait. It looks like a floating head in a sea of red. This is awful. Horrendous.”
One person said, “This is terrifying. Red is ALWAYS a bad sign unless it’s roses. This looks like a blood bath,” while another added, “It looks like it’s on fire.”
Despite the negative feedback, there were also positive remarks such as, “I love the portrait. It’s beautiful.” These mixed reactions highlight the polarizing nature of the portrait and the strong emotions it has stirred among the public.
What it actually represents
Jonathan Yeo, a well-known artist renowned for his innovative style in painting people, has gained praise for his ability to merge classic techniques with new ideas in portraiture. Yeo’s method involves more than just painting what someone looks like; he delves deep into the personalities of his subjects to capture their true essence.
In his latest work portraying King Charles III, Yeo stayed true to this approach. He aimed to strip away any distractions in the painting, focusing solely on allowing viewers to connect with the person behind the royal title. By spending time with the king and understanding him on a personal level, Yeo was able to create a portrait that goes beyond surface appearances and reveals the human within.
In Yeo’s portrait of King Charles III, one striking detail is the presence of a butterfly. This butterfly isn’t just a random addition; it holds deep symbolism and serves multiple purposes. Yeo explained that beyond representing the beauty of nature, the butterfly also highlights the environmental causes that the King has long supported, even before they became widely discussed.
Moreover, the butterfly adds visual interest to the portrait, breaking the uniformity and adding layers of meaning. In art history, butterflies often symbolize transformation and renewal, mirroring the King’s journey from Prince to monarch during the time the portrait was painted. This choice underscores the significant changes in King Charles’s life.
Yeo expressed his gratitude for the opportunity to create such an important portrait, “To try and capture that for His Majesty The King, who occupies such a unique role, was both a tremendous professional challenge and one which I thoroughly enjoyed and am immensely grateful for.”
Explore King Charles III’s life in-depth with 8 Things About King Charles III That Will Help Us Understand Him Better. Delve beyond his royal image to uncover intriguing insights into his interests, personal stories, and distinctive characteristics.
Leave a Reply