Yes, this is very very true. However, it is the Travoltas who claim that there were two nannies and Jett was never alone, had door chimes, etc.
It is also very very true that seizures can be very hard to control and you may never find the right drug combination...but you also might..if you try. One of the members, who was high up in the organization, who left the organization, tells of what she went through because they made her quit taking her seizure medication.
I found the answer for ArizonaCarolyns comment.
CCHR, a Scientology organization, considers Depakote as an antipsychotic drug and it is listed in one of their reports. Therefore, since ArizonaCarolyn says they wouldn’t use the drug if they didn’t believe in psychiatric drugs for kids....she must question whether they really did use the drug.
Scientology got in the way of this kid’s health but just about everyone here thinks that is okay..and calls me sick for even questioning it.
Sad state of affairs when posters on a conservative website don’t think twice about the welfare of a disabled child that was a victim of Scientology.
Doesn’t matter. It was their decision whether or not to medicate their kid. How a family chooses - CHOOSES - to take care of their “afflicted” or “disabled” child is their choice. I’m reminded - maybe because i have a deaf kid - of people who think that the answer is to implant and “fix” that kid, whether or not that’s the right answer for the child (or family).
I also think a LOT of this is conjecture on the part of the media. Not much has been published about this family.
I think the Travoltas deserve to be left alone.
I hate to say it....but I am seeing a very disturbing correlation here. And yet, an odd and opposite response from the so-called conservatives here.
From the posts I’ve read so far....the concensus here among most of the posters seems to be that it’s nobody’s business but the Travoltas’ if they withheld medicine from their son, whether due to their religion or otherwise.
And yet, I seem to recall most everyone here at FR being outraged and upset over the withholding of just food and water, at the behest of Terri Shiavo’s husband. Most of the FR posters, myself included, were up in arms about that deliberate causing of her death. Now granted, Terri was an adult, not a child. But it seems to me the same rule would apply. Withholding the care necessary to keep an innocent life alive is wrong, no matter how you spin, slice or cut it. The only people I saw saying it was OK to just let Terri die back then were rabid lefties and DemocRats. Interesting how just the opposite “seems” to be the case here and now on this issue.
For the record...my heart goes out to the Travoltas for their loss and yes, I’ve always enjoyed John’s movies... BUT there is a principle to be acknowledged and dealt with here. And no, in my opinion and from my observation and experience, you do NOT have the right to withhold medical treatment from your children if it would save their life. That’s called child abuse and yes, people HAVE gone to prison for just such neglect. I have no doubt that since this is concerning a well-known and well-liked celebrity, if it is found that the Travoltas were negligent, no action will be taken against them. Still and all, the issue begs looking into more closely and I do see and understand the concern here by a few.
(just my two cents)