Replies

The problem with this situation is that, depending on the extent of involvement of the lymph nodes, early stage Hodgkin's Disease is one of the most curable cancers known. Patients with Stage I HD who are treated with chemotherapy have a "cure rate" approaching 90%. IMO, for these parents to allow this minor child to refuse the conventional treatment for Hodgkin's Disease is the height of irresponsibility.

I saw the boy, his father, and his lawyer on Hannity last night and he IS very well spoken. When questioned about his one chemo treatment, he said that he was so nauseated that he "wanted to die". I have twin daughters, who, thank God, have never had to have chemo, but who have said the same thing when experiencing severe menstrual cramps. I did not for one minute believe that they really wanted to die.

I am usually very much on the side of the parental rights crowd, but, in this case, I must disagree. Children of 16 often think they know everything, but this young boy apparently does not realize that he may be signing his own death warrant by putting his faith in a Mexican clinic that could be a fraud. I am a devout Christian and I believe that God can heal this young man, but I also believe that He guides the hands of the doctors and researchers who provide medical treatment for conditions such as Hodgkin's. There are things that can be done to alleviate the side effects of the chemotherapy. With the established success rate of the treatment, the life of this young man is certainly worth some temporary discomfort.

Stated differently, a government that forces persons to not ingest certain drugs can force persons to ingest certain drugs.

They force persons not to ingest drugs that are harmful. This ruling is forcing someone to take drugs that are harmful.

True. And if you're consistent to principle you'll agree that the common denominator is that the government initiates force in all of the above. In all instances the initiated force causes harm either by forcing the drug or the fine and-or/imprisonments imposed by the government for not abiding it's ruling/laws. A person that takes a harmful drug is forced into fines and/or prison. A person doesn't take a harmful drug is forced into fines and/or prison.

The government/FDA is way far from perfection. The alternative treatment may eliminate the cancer without the negative side effects of chemo. I notice you didn't say a word about alternative therapies to government/FDA approved ones.

You probably don't know that standard operating procedure for the FDA is to let five, six, ten or more people suffer or die from lack of medication or therapy rather than grant FDA approval for a drug or therapy that causes one person to suffer or die from the drug or therapy.

It is in the self-interest of the FDA to not have the blemish of approving a drug that kills people, despite how many more lives it saves. That is irrational and a crime to let people die when they could have lived. Just as it is in the government's self interest to not allow the FDA to approve medical marijuana despite not even one death ever caused by marijuana. That too is irrational, a crime to impose suffering on persons that could live without the suffering.

More on violating the inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness see post 26.