Posted on 05/20/2009 5:37:37 AM PDT by Abathar
SLEEPY EYE, Minn., May 20 (UPI) -- An arrest warrant was issued for the mother of a Minnesota teen after the pair missed a court hearing on the son's fight against chemotherapy, police said.
Colleen Hauser and her son, Daniel, 13, have been missing from their Sleepy Eye, Minn., farm since Monday after they went to a medical appointment that indicated the son's cancer was worsening, the St. Paul Pioneer Press reported Wednesday.
Only the boy's father, Anthony Hauser, was in court Tuesday for the hearing called to review a court-ordered X-ray to assess whether the younger Hauser's Hodgkin's lymphoma was getting worse. The father said he didn't know the whereabouts of his wife or son.
Brown County, Minn., District Judge John Rodenberg ruled last week Daniel Hauser must receive chemotherapy even though the treatment goes against the family's spiritual beliefs and wishes. The Hausers belong to the Nemenhah, a quasi-American Indian group favoring natural remedies and opposes medicine that attacks or harms the body.
(Excerpt) Read more at upi.com ...
I’m between two fires with this one. On the one hand, I don’t like the idea of courts being able to order anybody to undergo any medical treatment.
On the other hand, I sure hope they find that kid and that they’re able to save his life. Heathen religions are all very well, but there is only one God, and only He can heal illnesses.
If the kid dosent want it, dont give it to him. There are too many patients dying today that would LOVE to have a highly curable form of cancer. I know, i was cured over 5 years ago of this exact cancer, Hodgkins. The treatment wasnt fun, but then i thought that dying would be less fun... he will find out the hard, and extremly painful way.
I believe that the parents can raise their child any way they want right up until society deems it abuse. The odds that have been given are 90% chance of full recovery if he gets the treatment vs. 5% if he doesn’t.
Guardianship means just that, putting the welfare of the child above all else, and these parents are not doing it.
If the kid was 18 then they can do whatever they want, hell even if the odds are 50/50 currently then the courts should butt out, but with the odds the doctors are giving then this falls fully under negligence IMHO, no matter what their religious beliefs are.
It’s difficult to argue with that. Plenty of people I know have successfully combatted Cancer, and only one has succumbed. Chances are good that the doctors can help this kid. Chances are excellent that the parents’ heathen religion can’t do a darn thing.
Gotta feel sorry for the kid: he won’t know which way is up.
That’s just it though, the kid thinks that sucking on some grass soup and chewing some aspen bark will cure him, because that’s what his parents have told him.
Once he turns 18 then he can kill himself if he wants, but right now it’s his parents that are going to kill him with their beliefs, and that’s wrong IMHO when the odds coming from the doctors are so one sided.
This young man has stated that he does not want intervention by anyone. He does not want to be forced into undergoing chemo therapy, "he will kick and scream and punch anyone who tries to force him". That statement pretty much sums up his stance on the matter.
Unlike the unborn who have no voice, except the courts, and are violently removed and exterminated, this courageous yooung man has determined that he does not want to be forced to accept life saving measures.
I believe there is a God and he alone determines the time and place for calling his children home, this cancer the young man has can be seen as such a calling home.
The parents are not heathens, wherever you got that idea, you are wrong.
This proves the government has overstepped its bounds wrt to this boy. He has the right to make decisions about his medical care, after having undergone one chemo treatment. Oh, I forgot this is a boy with cancer, not a girl making the decision to kill her child.
I’m not convinced that it’s a First Amendment issue, or if it is that the First Amendment gets to trump all other considerations.
For example, if my religion required human sacrifice, should the First Amendment’s “...or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” trump the fact that practising that aspect of my religion would involve murder? Surely not. The murder consideration trumps the First Amendment.
And so it is that the “Negligent Homicide” considerations probably trump the First Amendment considerations (if any) in this case.
No right is absolute.
If the kid dosent want it, dont give it to him.
________________________________________________
The kid doesn’t understand it, so how can he be expected to choose and make a reasonable decision? His parents have told him that he’s fine and that he’s not sick anymore. And he can’t read. I don’t know if he’s got a learning disability or just really bad homeschooling, but he can’t read about his condition himself, and they won’t let him speak to the doctor about it.
The parents say they are Roman Catholics. I don’t remember anything like this from my Catholic school days...
You've got that right, I vote keeping him alive long enough, and in spite of, his ignorance until he learns and has the right to make his own mind up.
If he chooses to die then I have no problem with it.
Did they talk to the boy? LIke I said on some other thread, when my son was getting chemo, there were teens there ranging from 12-20 who decided not to continue with treatment and their decisions were respected.
I am too in between a rock and a hard place on this one. But, the mother just made matters worse by doing this.
Once again, we see people being sucked into the “cult of the child.” He (a minor) doesn’t want the treatment so he (a minor) should be allowed to refuse. What happened to adults knowing what is best for a minor? Since when do we allow minors to decide what is best for them?
The parent is withholding valuable information from the boy and this is one of those rare instances where the authorities should step in.
As someone else said, if he were an adult, then it would be his choice, but he is not. He is a child, he doesn’t have the right to make this decision over his body
It’s only a choice if it involves killing an innocent unborn person.
Unfortunately, we are now at that slippery slope where the government will be telling us what treatment we will and will not be allowed to have. Since this boy is a minor, there is quite a bit of money to be made off his back by CPS, otherwise they would not have gotten involved.
From the story:
The Hausers belong to the Nemenhah, a quasi-American Indian group favoring natural remedies and opposes medicine that attacks or harms the body.
Heathens.
When my grandmother was found to have cancer similar statistics were used to convince her to spart expensive chemo and radiation therapy. They said without the treatment she would be dead within a year. Instead she died in two months from the treatment. Doctors don’t know it all. The last time I checked freedom meant that the individual has the right to go against even the do gooders.
Exactly, guardianship means just that. My kids would probably love to have ice cream for breakfast if given the choice.
They don’t have that choice because we do what’s best for them, even if they disagree at the time.
such a shame considering the survival rate today of this type of cancer. my mom died at 24 yrs old in 1957 of this same thing as they didn’t even know what was wrong with her. they treated her for chronic sore throats etc until one day a friend of the family that was a nurse told my dad that he should take mom to a clinic in a nearby town. that clinic was a cancer clinic. by that time it was to late to do anything for her. hopefully these parents will come to their senses and get their son the treatment that he deserves.
Doctors don’t know it all. The last time I checked freedom meant that the individual has the right to go against even the do gooders.
Well said. Sometimes it’s a little scary reading the replies on this board. One would think this is a site for FREEDOM-loving, independent people, but the opposite is often revealed. Many expose themselves to be nothing but intolerant statists that worship science and ‘the authorities’ above all else. Science and mdicine should be there to help those who want it, beleive it will help them and will undergo it of their own free will. Having government (however well-meaning) force treatments and drugs upon people against their will sets up a nightmarish scenario in which everyone will find themselves in soon enough, once universal health care sets in.
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.