Judge Orders Teen to Cancer Treatment (social services hypocrisy)

Associated Press ^ | 7/21/06 | Sonja Barisic

[zeller the zealot]

Another example of "social services" eroding the authority of parents. Even if you disgree with the chosen method of treatment, it is their call to make for their child. The state has no right to interfere. Besides the obvious hypocrisy of our society to say it's okay for a 16 year old to get an abortion without her parent's consent.

[cyborg]

Well yes we wouldn't want the boy to have a fighting indepdendent spirit. No that State hates that. After all convetion fails, one should lay down and accept one's fate unless the State reaches out with their holy hand.

[bybybill]

SAD

[Zon]

There has been several threads on Judge Jesse E. Demps ruling. I have posted this to each of them with almost no response. The reason seems obvious. Many people that are against Judge Demps ruling also favor the WOsomeD. It's similar to threads regarding government coercing parents to put their young children on Ritalin.

A government that can step on parental rights and force a fully informed young adult to ingest certain drugs or undertake a certain therapy can surely do the same to an adult. Stated differently, a government that prohibits persons from ingesting certain drugs can force persons to ingest certain drugs.

[metmom]

I know adults who tried that with no interference. It's unbelievable that the government can force people to do something against their better judgment or against their will. Cancer treatments are not guaranteed effective anyway either so IMO, the kids is no worse off trying his own way.

[Savage Rider]

Old news. Stay issued by a higher judge and the boy doesn't have to go to treatment for now.

[cyborg]

Good grief. Here I thought this happened on friday while I was on the road and had no internet.

[navyblue]

You want him to have a "fighting, independent chance" with some quack cure the way Steve McQueen did in Mexico?

Horse Hockey! Give the kid a real chance with proven medical cures.

And I "been there, done that" so to speak.

[cyborg]

He tried the conventional way FIRST. Steve McQueen and others like him were at death's door FIRST. It wasn't a PROVEN CURE for him now was it? I am NOT here to argue chemo drugs with you at two in the morning. This is about someone getting sick on drugs and wanting SOMETHING ELSE.

[Jeff Gordon]

Chemo makes one very sick. It is a form of torture.


If they can order Chemo for a kid they should be able to give Chemo to the Msulims in Gitmo.

[DJ MacWoW]

That article is from July 21. These are an updated articles.

Judge suspends lower court orders - Teen won't have to report for chemotherapy

Judge Says Teen Won't Have to Undergo Chemo Treatment for Now

[jeremiah]

During the 80's and early 90's, they were giving chemotherapy drugs that were too deadly for cancer patients, in an attempt to "cure" AIDS cases. Nearly 100% of those treated died, giving the reputation for AIDS being deadly its first boost. Now that they no longer use these drugs, deaths are way down. Does the govt know best? Seldom if ever. Will making this young man go through mandatory treatment make him well, odds are against it.

[paulat]

He tried the conventional way FIRST. Steve McQueen and others like him were at death's door FIRST. It wasn't a PROVEN CURE for him now was it? I am NOT here to argue chemo drugs with you at two in the morning. This is about someone getting sick on drugs and wanting SOMETHING ELSE.

I've had cancer...a double mastectomy...chemo...it's hell.

Of COURSE a kid wants something else.

Soometimes, that's what it takes...and sometines it takes an adult to make that decision.

And, yes, conventional therapy for this kid cures 95%.

[cyborg]

I'm not arguing about drugs. I'm arguing the parents' right to make medical decisions for their children and not the government.

[Lancey Howard]

The state has no right to interfere.

Agreed!

As long as this family is spending their own money, then they should be able to pursue any treatment they want for the boy. I remember many years ago a bunch of us organized beef 'n beers to raise maoney for a friend who had a real bad case of MS so he could go to Mexico for rattlesnake venom treatment.

Of course, if this family wants to spend MY money for health care, then "the state" certainly can tell them how to spend it.

[zeller the zealot]

Thanks for the update. I've been working way too long on a project and am now catching up on news. I was outraged at the lower judges ruling and posted it as soon as I read it.
This case is only incidently a referendum on conventional treatment vs. alternative methods. It's about parental sovereignty over their household. Is the state our defacto overlord, or do we have freedom of choice for our children?

[JamesP81]

Horse Hockey!

It may very well be. That does not give the State the right to tell him to take drugs he doesn't want to take. That choice is his alone.

[paulat]

I'm not arguing about drugs. I'm arguing the parents' right to make medical decisions for their children and not the government.

I understand. Kids are not in the position to know what works. A lot of times, what works hurts.

[cyborg]

okay well I'm not going to debate with you over this...have a good night.

[DJ MacWoW]

Kids are not in the position to know what works. A lot of times, what works hurts.

Except it didn't work the first time. It was back in 2 months. So they want to give him much higher doses and he was VERY ill the first time. I checked stats on this and 80% live 5 years if chemo works. 5 years? Let this young man make his own choices.