Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Teen with cancer can forgo chemotherapy
Associated Press ^ | 08/16/06

Posted on 08/16/2006 8:08:37 AM PDT by presidio9

A 16-year-old cancer patient 's legal fight ended in victory Wednesday when his family's attorneys and social services officials reached an agreement that would allow him to forgo chemotherapy.

At the start of what was scheduled to be a two-day hearing, Accomack County Circuit Judge Glen A. Tyler announced that both sides had reached a consent decree, which Tyler approved.

Under the decree, Starchild Abraham Cherrix, who is battling Hodgkin's disease, will be treated by an oncologist of his choice who is board-certified in radiation therapy and interested in alternative treatments. The family must provide the court updates on Abraham's treatment and condition every three months until he's cured or turns 18.

Tyler emphasized that the decree states that the parents weren't medically neglectful.

Abraham saw the doctor last week, and defense attorneys told the judge that the doctor has indicated that he thinks that Abraham can be cured.

After the short hearing, the judge looked at Abraham and said, "God bless you, Mr. Cherrix."

Last summer, the teen was diagnosed with Hodgkin's disease, a cancer of the lymphatic system considered very treatable in its early stages. He was so debilitated by three months of chemotherapy that he declined a second, more intensive round that doctors recommended early this year.

He since has been using an alternative herbal treatment called the Hoxsey method, the sale of which was banned in the United States in 1960.

After Abraham chose to go on the sugar-free, organic diet and take liquid herbal supplements under the supervision of a Mexican clinic, a social worker asked a juvenile court judge to intervene to protect the teen's health. Last month, the judge found Abraham's parents neglectful and ordered Abraham to report to a hospital for treatment as doctors deem necessary.

Lawyers for the family appealed, and an Accomack County Circuit Court judge suspended that order and scheduled a new trial to settle the dispute. The judge scheduled the trial for two days but has indicated he would like to finish in one, said John Stepanovich, a lawyer for the parents.

Abraham is still on the Hoxsey method, but Stepanovich stressed that the family hasn't ruled out other possible treatments, such as immunotherapy or radiation treatment in small doses.

According to the American Cancer Society, there is no scientific evidence that Hoxsey is effective in treating cancer in people. The herbal treatment is illegal in the United States but can be obtained through clinics in Mexico, and some U.S. naturopathic practitioners use adapted versions of the formula.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Extended News; News/Current Events; US: Virginia
KEYWORDS: 714x; alternativemedicine; bigbrother; billybest; cancer; deathculture; govwatch; health; healthcare; hodgkinsdisease; homeopathy; medicine; nannystate; ruling; teens
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 next last
To: Froufrou
The exception would have been had he illegally refused chemo.

And how exactly would it ever be illegal to refuse chemo?
21 posted on 08/16/2006 8:33:26 AM PDT by JamesP81 ("Never let your schooling interfere with your education" --Mark Twain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

If he survives: more power to him. If he doesn't: he will have made his contribution.


22 posted on 08/16/2006 8:34:13 AM PDT by RightWhale (Repeal the law of the excluded middle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: evad

I hope not. I can say that from what I've read about chemotherapy, I wouldn't personally take it for myself, either.


23 posted on 08/16/2006 8:36:12 AM PDT by freepertoo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: JamesP81; Froufrou
And how exactly would it ever be illegal to refuse chemo?

He was court ordered to report to the hospitol to undergo whatever treatment the doctors deemed necessary..........refusing that would probably amount to contempt of court.

24 posted on 08/16/2006 8:36:32 AM PDT by Gabz (Taxaholism, the disease you elect to have (TY xcamel))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Gabz
He was court ordered to report to the hospitol to undergo whatever treatment the doctors deemed necessary..........refusing that would probably amount to contempt of court.

Just because it's a court order doesn't make it right. This is a decision the court is not permitted to make. I would consider him under no obligation to be obedient to unjust law that violates everything the Framers stood for. The Court can go get stuffed.
25 posted on 08/16/2006 8:37:48 AM PDT by JamesP81 ("Never let your schooling interfere with your education" --Mark Twain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Brightside
Abortion = premeditated murder.

Big difference.
26 posted on 08/16/2006 8:39:14 AM PDT by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God) .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: JamesP81

That's what this was about James. The state took over when his parents refused on his behalf.


27 posted on 08/16/2006 8:41:28 AM PDT by Froufrou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

The cure rate for Hodgkins Disease is very high. Most patients survive the disease. Many patients who relapse after first line therapy are cured by second-line chemotherapy. So-called alternative therapies have no basis in science and are often peddled by frauds seeking to exploit the sick and desperate. I hope this person gets a second opinion from scientifically minded oncologists and receives proper care.


28 posted on 08/16/2006 8:42:37 AM PDT by jalisco555 ("Dogs look up to us, cats look down on us and pigs treat us as equals" Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GovernmentShrinker
Certainly there are no guarantees (although success rates are around 85% with standard treatment) and we can hope for a "miracle" but my comment was based on his pursuit of this particular treatment plan....

"He since has been using an alternative herbal treatment called the Hoxsey method, the sale of which was banned in the United States in 1960."

The "alternative treatment" to be provided by his board certified oncologist may work, but it's a big risk. It's going against the odds.

If we were talking about some senior citizen who had pretty much lived out his life I could understand it better but this is a 16 year old kid who could have a long life ahead.

Just my opinion of course but I'd rather my son have the 85% chance.

29 posted on 08/16/2006 8:42:38 AM PDT by evad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Froufrou
That's what this was about James. The state took over when his parents refused on his behalf.

They refused because he wanted them to. He's 16 years old. He's gonna have to start making his own choices, and it sets a very bad example when Uncle Sam tries to do it for him.
30 posted on 08/16/2006 8:43:16 AM PDT by JamesP81 ("Never let your schooling interfere with your education" --Mark Twain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Always Right
"What you put into your body is one of the most important factors in health, but for the most part Western Medicine does not believe in diet. I guess they don't believe patients can actually stick to a strict diet and instead rely on prescribing pills and treatments for everything."

BINGO!

Absolutely CORRECT!

AloPATHETIC doctors refuse to acknowledge that good nutritious food and exercise are VERY important. Business would dry up and their buddies in the drug companies wouldn't have the enormous profits and people addicted to them.

The standing joke is quick operate before the patient gets better. YOUR health is the last thing they are concerned about. They've gone to the opposite extreme from what the father of medicine stated.
31 posted on 08/16/2006 8:43:48 AM PDT by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God) .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: JamesP81

I certainly do not disagree with you.


32 posted on 08/16/2006 8:44:22 AM PDT by Froufrou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

I think just having the stress of this nonsense over with will be good for his health.


33 posted on 08/16/2006 8:45:40 AM PDT by wagglebee ("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JamesP81

I'm in total agreement. I've been on this young man and his family's side since the get go.


34 posted on 08/16/2006 8:46:14 AM PDT by Gabz (Taxaholism, the disease you elect to have (TY xcamel))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: presidio9; Blogger; Moose4

This is a rare example of a case where government intervention worked well, with everyone behaving reasonably. It was not unreasonable of the social worker to seek court intervention, given the basic facts of the situation, nor was it unreasonable for the court to intervene. After all, while parents have a right to raise their children as they see fit, both common sense and the law recognize that this doesn't extend to the right to torture them or withhold obviously life-saving medical treatment or restrict them to bizarre diets which guarantee ill health long into adulthood and even risk death prior to reaching adulthood. Hopefully, everyone here can agree that the parents who killed their adoptive daughter by following a kook therapist's advice to subject her to "forced water drinking therapy" as "treatment" for "attachment disorder", had no right to pursue that method of child-rearing.

The court took all the information into account, giving proper weight to the right of parents to govern their children's lives within reason, and the natural (though not legal) right of a legal minor who is old enough and intelligent enough the situation to have a say in his own life-and-death decisions, and to the demonstrated sanity of both the parents and the child. The parents, notwithstanding the kooky name they gave their son, have behaved rationally all along -- they did have him undergo the mainstream recommended treatment of chemotherapy, rather than ignore reality and run straight to some "alternative" practitioner (the sort whose patient rosters are heavy on people with names like "Starchild"). The parents also didn't refuse to deal with the court system, and grab the kid and disappear. Neither the parents nor the child are rejecting all further mainstream medical treatment out of hand, but rather are just rejecting the single one they tried already and decided from experience wasn't worth it.

Too bad this sort of process and outcome is so rare when government authorities intervene in family matters.


35 posted on 08/16/2006 8:48:31 AM PDT by GovernmentShrinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: evad

Just watch my 23 year old child die in 6 months after 26 days of radiation and 4 rounds of chemotherapy. I'd say in 6 months time he had a total of two weeks where he felt really good.

I'm all for the kid choosing a higher quality of life for however long his life will be-- and avoiding another round of chemo. It's barbarism.


36 posted on 08/16/2006 8:49:02 AM PDT by steveyp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: steveyp
I feel bad for your loss, I can even empathize.

It doesn't however change the statistical facts about the success rates of standard treatment in this type of cancer.

37 posted on 08/16/2006 8:51:59 AM PDT by evad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: nmh

I have to agree. I'm not prepared to say it is a "conspiracy", but the role of the nutritionist in the cancer fight of my child was pathetic. You cannot tell a young person to "eat whatever they want"-- the presumption then is that nutrition then plays no role in the fight (i.e. Drink ensure or boost).

We were at a comprehensive cancer center, and the consideration given to nutrition was criminal.


38 posted on 08/16/2006 8:53:01 AM PDT by steveyp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: evad
The "alternative treatment" to be provided by his board certified oncologist may work, but it's a big risk. It's going against the odds.

The "alternative treatment" might just work. A lot of what makes the body of official medicine came for the "alternative" side. Many medications are derived (purified or synthetic) from natural/herbal medication.

There are many examples of how the "alternative treatment" could be superior. Until the first half of XX century the East European peasants were mocked for their method for curing infected wounds: they were putting the molded bread on them. After the discovery of penicillin this example of peasant superstition disappeared from the handbooks.

39 posted on 08/16/2006 8:53:25 AM PDT by A. Pole (Nicolas Gomez-Davilla: "The function of revolutions is to destroy the illusions that created them.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Froufrou

The exception would have been had he illegally refused chemo.

A government that can prohibit certain drugs or therapy can force persons to ingest certain drugs or therapy. Happens quite often with the WOD and Ritalin.

Every person breaks the law several times a year, Yet, with all that lawlessness society has not plunged into self-destruction. It didn't last year, a decade ago, fifty years nor a century ago. At the rate of 3,000 new laws and regulations created at the federal level each year how is it that persons and society don't run headlong into destruction without the new laws to come next year and each year thereafter -- yet in reality persons and society increasingly prosper despite not having the supposed benefits of future laws and despite massive lawlessness?

Politicians and bureaucrats are parasitical elites. They feed/leech off the working man and working woman. Without the workers of the world, value producers, the parasitical elites would perish because they are net value destroyers. 

40 posted on 08/16/2006 8:57:33 AM PDT by Zon (Honesty outlives the lie, spin and deception -- It always has -- It always will.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson