Wednesday, January 07, 2015 8:22:02 AM · by justlittleoleme · 27 replies
Heavy ^ | January 6, 2015 | Paul Farrell
Posted on 01/08/2015 7:53:20 AM PST by GIdget2004
HARTFORD — For the state's child-protection agency and the cancer doctors at Connecticut Children's Medical Center, there is no debate: 17-year-old Cassandra C. will die of Hodgkin's lymphoma without chemotherapy, and the teen doesn't have the legal standing to reject the treatments on her own.
But at a noon hearing Thursday before the state Supreme Court, the justices will consider the constitutional argument from lawyers for Cassandra and her mother, Jackie Fortin, who supports her daughter's decision to reject chemotherapy treatments. The Department of Children and Families won temporary custody of Cassandra at the Superior Court level and Cassandra, of Windsor Locks, has been receiving regular treatments for more than four weeks at CCMC.
The question, says Cassandra's lawyer, Assistant Public Defender Joshua Michtom, is whether, despite an encouraging prognosis, "a smart and knowledgeable 17-year-old (can) make the same choice, for better or worse, than she would be able to make without state interference nine months from now, when she turns 18," said Michtom.
Wednesday, as Michtom made final preparations for his argument, he noted that society permits children to be tried in adult court for certain crimes, or conversely, to be tried in juvenile court for the same crime, depending on the history of that child. He pointed out that minors can seek an abortion, receive addiction treatment, or give blood without parental consent.
"We're asking the court to apply that same logic to a major medical decision,'' said Michtom. "Maturity isn't something that just happens overnight at the age of 18. Maturity occurs over the course of adolescence."
(Excerpt) Read more at courant.com ...
Libs believe ...
She has the complete right to choose to terminate a pregnancy.
She had no right to choose her own medical care with regard to everything outside of pregnancy.
>>She has the complete right to choose to terminate a pregnancy.
She had no right to choose her own medical care with regard to everything outside of pregnancy.
<<
The “life uber alles” crowd will be along momentarily to attack you.
Be ready.
Big Government butting in to force medical treatment against the will of those affected. Not exactly the hallmark of a “free” society.
Sad situation.
The article doesn’t say much about how the young lady is addressing her illness, whether by using alternate medicine, or choosing no treatment whatsoever.
They may have well been advised to claim religious exemption from treatment if they were insistent on avoiding chemotherapy.
Precedent indicates that if the state can sanction taking away life (abortion, death penalty), and force vaccinations, then the state can do anything it damn well pleases.
“Approximately 90% to 95% of children with Hodgkin lymphoma can be cured”:
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/treatment/childhodgkins/HealthProfessional/page1
The same is true for ALL childhood leukemias. Thus refusal of treatment for childhood childhood leukemia is equivalent to refusing to give antibiotics that will cure your child of a fatal bacterial infection or refusing to have a child’s compound fracture repaired.
Is it child abuse for a parent to refuse treatments for the above two medical conditions? Murder, even? If so, then that would be the case for refusing treatment for childhood childhood leukemias.
Seems like a fundamental hypocrisy exists that teenagers can be “charged as adults” for criminal acts, but cannot be allowed to make this type of decision.
If you’re interested in watching the proceedings, the State Supreme Court hearing is being streamed live:
http://foxct.com/on-air/live-streaming/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.