Considering the definition of hedonism, outlined at the beginning of the second paragraph, the Epicurean perception of hedonism reflects the idea that pleasure and freedom from pain are the only things desirable as ends. That is, things are desirable for intrinsic pleasure in themselves, or as a means of promoting pleasure and preventing pain. I would like to draw attention to two points within the definition “promotion of pleasure and prevention of pain”. Assuming the parent is a mature adult, he knows from life experience that many unpleasant circumstances produce happiness as a result. This being a fact, a parent's desire for the child's lasting happiness automatically explains a certain measure of pain and unpleasant circumstances. The parent's goal would be to minimize discomfort, not eliminate it entirely. Prolonged misery is what a “normal” parent would want their child to avoid the non-temporary pain and comfort that leads to happiness. Furthermore, if hedonism is true, the parent wants happiness for themselves, as well as their child, and no “normal” parent would be happy to approve of an unnecessary lobotomy. The parent would subject themselves to prolonged suffering by allowing their child to be robbed of their natural senses. Not to mention that one of the purposes of having children is to pass on genetic information to the next generation, lobotomized offspring would not be eligible to continue procreation.