This article presents the authors' response to Gunther and Diekema's argument about growth attenuation and due process. As a case study, growth attenuation raises complicated issues. The authors address some issues that have not been sufficiently addressed. Those involve family support, assistive technology, constitutional rights to "self," the standards and procedures for decision making, and the social construction of disability. Then, they connect this case to two other issues: the human genome project and the uses of neuroscience. Both seek to enhance a person in order to achieve a quality of life that is more acceptable to the person, the person's family, and society. They conclude by looking to the future of enhancing the quality of life of people and families affected by disability. But they do so, fully mindful of the nation's shameful history of discrimination, all too often abetted by professionals aggressively employing usual and innovative technologies.