It always makes me sad when I hear a story of a parent who is required by law to get some sort of medical help for his child. I can see both sides.
I see the parent who thinks that chemo is killing her child–or for whatever reason–believes that the human body or that God can make the child well. I see that. I know first-hand how bad chemo can be. I know it can also save a life.
I see that it is also sad when the law must step in and take control. Like the mother of Daniel Hauser–she clearly loves the child, she gave birth to him and has loved and raised him. It does seem unfair that the law must step in.
These are tough cases.
From a purely ethical point of view…we, the society, have a responsibility to protect the child. Are we robbing a parent of their rights as parents? Maybe.
Still, we’ve proven that it is a price we are willing to pay in order to try to reasonably save a life.
I am a cancer survivor. I did not have to have chemo. But as I told my wife, if it comes back and I need chemo, then I will base that decision one thing–what are the chances it will stop the cancer. If it is a 30/70 chance it will come back, then I will not do the chemo, if it is 50/50 then I will probably do it. I just do not want to put myself through the discomfort caused by chemo. If the mother is refusing treatment for the discomfort caused to her son, then I agree with her. But I have to ask what is Big Brother doing in this case anyway. Sounds like someone (hospital) wants to ensure they can get money for the treatment, and to heck if it works or not.
Hi Gary, Congratulations on being a cancer survivor. I have to question, too, what is Big Brother’s ultimate goal? Is it to ensure that every parent takes the recommended course of action by the medical community? That hardly seems fair to parents.
I can see, too, that if the doctors believe that is the ONLY way to save the child, the law must step in. It is a tough choice to make, having seen my mother go through chemo, I cannot imagine putting my son through that. On the other hand, I would want to save him. I feel for the mother and what she must be going through now. It must be tough.
I am also on the fence on this one. Heaven is on chemo, although low dosages that don’t seem to have as many horrible side effects as those with cancer deal with. (So far anyway, we are working on week two.)
I guess I resent when the government tells me what to do with my children, and I would be a hypocrite to say otherwise. I support home schooling, I support parents having the ultimate say. I have fought with the schools my children have attended because of my strong feelings about this subject. From minor things like pouring out my daughter’s kool-aid and telling her she had to drink water (because it is healthy for her) to allowing my daughter to go to the bathroom when she needed (a limit of two bathroom breaks per student was imposed.) To bigger issues such as allowing my daughter to stay at home when her illness is bad enough to require her staying home. (The problem is now that she has an autoimmune disease I don’t see the need to take her to the doctor for a note for each and every time this happens, as it is a waste of time and money to do so.)
I hate the idea of a parent allowing their child to die because of something I see as outrageous. If the choice is death verses a 75% cure rate, I hope the parent will make the choice I see as right. However, I fully appreciate that it is my thought of right verses wrong which is always subjective. So I would have to say I wouldn’t make it law… I know for some that might seem like a horrible thing to say, but I don’t see a way to have one without the other.
I don’t think I’d make it law either….Just too much potential abuse.
I’m sorry to hear about your daughter, you know. I hope the chemo is helping. I must say that I am floored by the issues you had to address with your school–that’s crazy. Some of things are way out-of-line.
As a breast cancer survivor it angers me to hear how the law is forcing the hand of this family, and perhaps even forcing the kid to a treatment they obviously don’t want.
I survived my initial diagnosis with a combination of surgery and holistic medicine. I had the option of chemo but chose to forego. My surgeon respected that. My cancer went on remission for 5 years. I knew that if it came back, I’d have a plan. Option 1, holistic treatment again. If that didn’t work, then I’d place my health in the hands of the most capable doctors. And when it came back last year, that is exactly what I ended up doing.
Even though some people today shake their head at my decisions, it is my body, my life and my family was very supportive. I am currently receiving systemic treatment (not chemo) at Columbia-Presbyterian, and under the care of the best in the field. I don’t believe one branch of medicine is better than the other.
As a patient, it is a matter of choices, even if you’re underage. The last thing a parent wants –especially a mother– is to kill their child. They have an alternative and made their choice. It’s not like they are chosing to forego any kind of treatment. They believe in something outside of traditional medicine and should be allowed to try it, even under the risk of failure. That is exactly what happens when we put ourselves in the hands of traditional medicine also!
It really bothers me to see that others are forcing their opinions on this family. It’s a terrible thing to do this family and this kid. On the one hand, you can stay in your home and be forced through horrendous chemo treatment, against your will, or on the other hand, flee, become an outlaw, land in foreign territory and look over your shoulder as you try to heal. How unfair and selfish of those who think they “know better.”
Only a cancer patient and those immediately in their circle truly know best. Face it, no treatment is 100% effective, and even at high rates of success, there are no guarantees.
When I made my choice, I knew full well all my options. There would be some that would argue that if I had gotten the chemo the first time around, the cancer wouldn’t have come back. But no one could ever guarantee that. One thing for sure is that this second time around, when the cancer usually comes back more aggressively, I am able to fight it with the “big guns” and with much success because my cancer cells had never been exposed to them before. So, chances of resistance are almost non existent. And thank God and the great doctors, I am responding well.
As a cancer patient you make your choices along with your family and they should be respected, regardless of what the “experts” say.
This is a sad and unfair situation put on that family. Shame on those who decided to take it to court. I agree with the poster above that it’s likely about the money and not about what’s best for the patient. Cancer treatments run in the thousands per visit. I know. No doubt, the hospital is going to “lose revenue” when they lose the patient to another form of therapy elsewhere. It is likely about the money.
Putting that kid and their parents through unnecessary grief and showing lack of respect for their decision as a family is very demoralizing and will only lower the kid’s chances of fighting the cancer successfully. Shame on them. Shame! Outrageous and unfair!
NYC-Survivor. Wow. First let me say thank you for sharing your story-it’s very compelling. You make a convincing argument for why the decision should be left to the parents. Second, I wish you much luck and success with your systemic treatments. I do not know much about alternative options or holistic medicine. Do you have any websites you can recommend for readers who might be faced with these decisions, both for themselves and their children? Kind regards, dam.
Ok, cancer aside, I thought the most telling part of the article is the line about how this 13 year old kid can’t read according to court papers…
Why cant a 13 year old read? is this some sort of bizarre religious thing too that you dont let your kids learn how to read? or is it incompetent ‘homeschooling’?
NYC-Survivor–
There is an enormous difference between your breast cancer diagnosis and this child’s lymphoma diagnosis. You had a solid tumor, not a hematologic malignancy, and from the sound of your story, you had resectable disease. Chemotherapy is offered after surgery to people with breast cancer to destroy potential microscopic disease, in order to prevent recurrence.
There is no surgical treatment for lymphoma. It is 100% fatal without chemotherapy; there have never been any published reports of successful outcomes with holistic approaches to this disease, but thankfully, his tumor is one of the most curable malignancies if he is offered prompt conventional treatment.
Ask yourself whether you would have been willing to choose holistic therapy alone rather than having your breast cancer surgically removed. That is closer to this child’s situation, but still not an exact comparison.
This child is not of an age to have enough insight to make this choice on his own, and his parents belong to a fringe religious sect that is run (for profit) by a Jewish charlatan who has fashioned himself as a pseudo-Native American healer. This guy is this decade’s Jim Jones or David Koresh, and he is preaching junk science for his own personal glory and financial gain. Would you want him influencing people you cared about to decide the fate of their children?
Thanks for the support Deb
I reread the article and don’t see (not that it isn’t there, I can be quite blind) where it says the boy can’t read. I would have to remove my earlier opinion, if the parents were that… uhh… well negligent. I know that once again I am passing judgment on something that isn’t 100% ever. However, in our society not to allow a child the basics (which sorry that is a basic need), is illegal and should be.
Now I realize that when I go with saying homeschooling should be an option I am including all sorts of things I don’t agree with (like religion), however, there has to be some essentials like reading. I am not able to articulate what changes parental prerogative to parental neglect at this time. (I will try to think on it.) However, there is a difference…
MD in Texas…Thank you for this additional information, especially about lymphoma.
Hello dam!
Thank you for your feedback. To respond to your question, I wish I had online information I could share with certainty and point people over. Due to the “litigious” nature of our society here in the states, and the fact that the institutions of traditional medicine have a “hold” of the 3 branches of power and the media, advising anyone online, to go to any particular place for treatment, is calling for trouble. How unfortunate!
Just like there are unethical politicians, doctors and executives of big pharma who wouldn’t benefit from cancer cures, there are quacks out there who will offer anything for a buck, claiming to have a cure. And you’ll find many of them in the Internet. There are so called “controversial” books and treatments out there.
Interestingly enough, outside of this country there are highly reputable doctors in traditional medicine who are heavily involved with research that involves alternative methods. But the “powers that be” won’t allow any of that here in the states. It all has to be sanctioned by the pharma companies, their buddies at the FDA, congress and the other two branches. (I used to be a pharma person–so I can speak with authority on that).
I will tell you from all I’ve read and researched, is that in Europe there are major centers of reputable alternative medicine, with Germany being at the lead. I understand they –in fact– are getting credible peer reviews from conventional medicine.
Check out this link at The Annals of Oncology, which discusses this very topic:
http://annonc.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/pdf_extract/2/10/699
CNN published an article here:
http://www.cnn.com/HEALTH/9809/01/alt.med/index.html
There are yearly Summits that brings doctors from all corners of the world to these meetings.
If I were a parent, I’d begin googling terms such as “natural medicine”, “germany”, and look into the major research centers over there.
One major caviat though. Cancer is a very “customized” disease. What works on one patient may not necessarily work on the other. No one has the answers yet. I do believe that only when traditional medicine and alternative medicine unite to fight against this terrible disease, we’ll have a hope of winning.
For as long as these two very important branches of medicine remain divided by competition and disdain for each other, many lives will be lost in the process.
LOL! It’d be the equivalent of wanting the Democrats and Republicans to make nice to help Americans pull out of the mess that was created by all the mistakes of the past.
But you never know…. miracles can happen.
Perhaps someone will start a movement. I know the CDC and the NIH are including homeopathic researchers now in their teams. So, there is hope.
I will pray for that kid and his mom. I have no doubt she’s in terrible agony and stress right now, fearing that if her kids doesn’t make it, she’ll have to live not only with her conscience but also with the unnecessary legal consequences some self-righteous jerk started for her. Whoever created this legal mess should apologize.
May God help them. I do wish them the best.
And again, many thanks for your kind feedback and good wishes dam.
Thanks for the link NYC-Survivor…I’m going to hop on over and take a look now! Did you see the post above by TX MD. Also an intersting perspective.
To an MD in Texas:
Lymphoma is not very easily cured with chemotherapy. I know the article stated odds of 80% to 95%, and I’m sorry to say this but someone exaggerated those numbers for the article. My son has THE most treatable form of pediatric cancer (ALL, or Acute Lymphosblastc Leukemia), and his odds are 85%. We know many other little kids going through chemo, some for the same cancer as the boy in the article, and those are not the numbers quoted to them. This is in a hospital in TN, working in partnership with St. Jude’s, so I can assure you we have the most up-to-date treatments/figures available.
What that quote means, is that under the most optimal circumstances, there is up to a 95% 5-year survivor rate. Optimal circumstances include age at diagnosis and several other factors, which based on this boy’s age are not even applicable to him. So those figures are totally irrelevant to this particualr circumstance.
Plus, please realize that those odds are not a “cure” rate. They are odds that the boy will not end up dying of his current cancer within 5 years. However, the side effects could kill him, the drugs could leave his body so fragile that he could easily die of minor infections, his risks of secondary cancers increase exponentially throughout the rest of his life, and the treatments put him at risk for all kinds of very serious, often permanent, damages to his body.
Treatment is also riskier in those with disabilities, and I did read in another article about this case that the boy couldn’t read because he had a learning disability. So that is another factor.
My husband and I decided that we would rather take the risks of treatment for out little boy, than certain death if he went untreated. BUT, this boy Daniel has already been through a round of treatment which was apparently very tortuous for him. If my son had been suffering terribly, that would have been a serious influence in our decision. I hope we never have to face such an agonizing choice, but there is no doubt in my mind that it should be OUR choice, not the goverments, as to what amount of suffering for my child is “acceptable”, what odds are appropriate to gamble upon.
I am scared of having a government forcing our children to undergo risky, potentially lethal treatment, with terrible suffering, high potential for permant damage, exponentially increased chances for secondary cancers, and at the end an uncertain outcome that, AT BEST, can only be guessed at for a five-year maximum. This is the essence of informed decision-making, and it belongs in the parents hands, and if they are wrong then it’s their mistake to make. Will the goverment care as much about making a mistake?
Dear MD in Texas,
I hear you and I respect where you’re coming from.
When I brought up my situation, I was not implying that it was exactly the same as the kid’s. I understand the differences well and I think most readers here are smart enough to get it. And in my case, even if I had chosen the chemo the first time around, I was risking death by complications brought on by chemo itself, as you well know. And even then, there are NO guarantees that the cancer won’t re-ocur.
The point behind my bringing up my situation was to illustrate that I was allowed –however it was– to make my own decisions, and my family supported me. We all knew I was taking my chances, and even my doctors, who advised one way, in the end, allowed me the space and time to follow my own path, whatever the treatment was. And I remain thankful to those amazing MDs, who are by the way, authorities in their field.
If the parents made a decision, it should be respected. If these were known abusive, neglectful parents who have documented tendencies to kill their child, I’d say go for it! Take them to court!
Forcing their hand is what bothers me.
You obviously sound better informed on they type of alternative treatment this mother is taking her child, so I won’t argue with you on this.
But I will say that I take everything I hear with a grain of salt, even if it comes from members of the traditional medicine profession bad mouthing others outside their institutional thinking, who may offer potentially working alternatives.
I have worked with hundreds of MDs in “teaching” them the ways of the latest pharmaceutical drug. I know how you guys think and what your training entails! There are amazing doctors who took my information and applied it when they felt it was best for the patient, but unfortunately there were many who only guided their therapeutic options when monetary rewards were dangled in front of them. And that also applied to major teaching institutions.
Therefore, I have become very skeptical of the true nobility of the profession and its institutions. Just because someone is a doctor, does not imply we should take their word without question. I would first want to know more about this doctor and find out what motivates them in their profession.
I am not saying you’re one of those unfortunate members that put profit ahead of the patient but I came across too many to keep my faith blindly in the hands of traditional medicine just because someone had the initials MD after their name.
Today I need to know my “doctor” well before I trust what they tell me.
I know you understand where I’m coming from because even if you are not one of those “profit-ahead-of-patient” doctors, you know who they are.
I have also seen reputable cancer studies not being published because some pharmaceutical company did not allow it. Or studies promoting a bad drug, hiding damaging data, being published in reputable journals to promote a drug later pulled from the market, after so many die.
Nowadays you have to question everything.
If you were the doctor of my kid, and I trusted you –because by then I’d know your practices– and you told me that this treatment was a “cure” as you state above, and that there were no chances of complications due to the treatment itself, I’d be crazy not to sign up for it.
But can you guarantee a “cure” with this treatment? Is it realistic to use that word? Don’t you think it’s misleading when no one dares to use the word “cure” in cancer?
One thing I have learned in fighting this disease is to ask all the relevant questions, research on my own, find third party data, find other survivors who went through the same and then make a decision.
I don’t know what prompted that family to make the choices they made, but I doubt that without rhyme or reason they would risk the life of their kid and go elsewhere. They must have seen complications with the treatment. They must have seen the risks, some awful side effects. You know well how chemo is. That is what kept me from doing it!
As you know well, there are times when the risks outweight the benefits.
By the way, the kid is 13. At that age you’re old enough to understand grown up issues. He’s not 3. He can speak and without a doubt express himself. In other countries some 13 year olds are working and raising families. I have no doubt he understands well his situation and had input in the decision.
So, let’s give him and his family some credit. And even if we don’t agree with their decision, it should be respected, no matter how crazy it may seem. I have no doubt they are aware of the risks.
Allowing the law to get involved in this family’s decision is very Big Brother. It’s wrong and against all our founding fathers fought and risked their lives for.
NYC Survivor–
I’m sorry, but I take great exception to your methods here.
First of all, Europe isn’t the only place where alternative therapies receive research support. Many U.S. academic institutions, where the majority of research studies are conducted, include NIH-sponsored protocols investigating alternative medicines for a myriad of diseases. Unfortunately, few of them make an impact clinically, because the therapeutic agents studied in this area are produced by companies that are not regulated by the FDA, many of whom are quite disreputable and unreliable in their manufacturing procedures.
A gentle reminder–all those alternative healers, naturpathic practitioners, and health food stores are out there to make a profit, just like allopathic physicians. The difference is that conventional doctors are actually subjected to rigorous training, are limited to prescribing medications that are closely monitored for adverse effects, and are subject to rules and regulations governed by a state licensing authority. Many of them do have an interest in holistic therapies, particularly osteopathic physicians, and the vast majority of them are not prostitutes for pharmaceutical companies. Most of them, oncologists in particular, are extremely focused on evidence-based medicine, which is the only approach to care that has been subjected to strict controls to both document efficacy and assess for toxicity. The alternative medicine field, as well as the herbal supplements market, are subjected to no such quality assurance methods; with them, you have a combination of unknown benefits coupled with a practitioner who wants to make a buck like everyone else. A dangerous combination, to say the least.
In regard to your choices for your breast cancer, you took a risk. There is no way of knowing whether your decision to forgo chemo will take years off your life–5 years is far too soon to make an educated decision about anything. You rolled the dice, and took a path that I unequivocally respect, but that I don’t agree with. You can make that choice because you’re an adult, capable of making educating decisions for yourself, and yourself only.
I do know one thing–cancer is the number one cause of death in the US at this point, and cancer death is often a terribly painful, miserable way to die. Everyone should be able to make educated choices about the treatment they receive, but statistically, traditional approaches overwhelmingly outperform holistic approaches when it comes to successful outcomes in the case of malignant disease.
Sincerely, I hope your choice works out for you. But campaigning on the web for others to follow your unproven, much riskier path, just so you can feel more secure in your choice, is quite irresponsible in my opinion. You might want to see what’s beyond the horizon before you encourage others to follow you over the cliff.
@nyc-survivor
You forgot one other caveat….
It has to work. =D
If you can’t clinically prove in a scientific experiment that something works…than it doesn’t work.
Ok everyone.
For the record, I am NOT advocating any treatment. That is a personal decision that should be made by each patient.
After all, it is only us and our families who eventually have to face the consequences, whatever they may be.
So, please md in TX, be nice and don’t go on the offensive here. You know very well you guys don’t have the answers nor the cures to cancer.
And Dave, I agree with you that it has to work. What’s more important, make sure that the “medicine” is not more harmful than the disease itself. Read Natalie’s comments up there before speaking up.
What I am advocating for here is the right of the patient and their family to make a decision without threat of doctors and lawyers taking you to court, making you a fugitive over your choices, even if you’re 13.
This I find outrageous.
Whatever cancer patients decide, many enlightened doctors have allowed their patients have a say in treatment choices without chastising them or threatening to tie them to the bed or else they are told they’ll die.
Many of you doctors out there think you know it all and don’t listen to your patients. Perfect example here.
Passing judgment on a patient’s choice is the very thing that turns patients off.
Did you read the post of the mom (Natalie) up there?
She illustrates exactly my point.
Please respect the patient’s choice.
Again, for the record, I am not advocating any treatment.
After all, I have placed myself in the hands of the best doctors here at Columbia-Presbyterian, professionals who treat me like a human being, who take my input before speaking up, and who don’t threaten me.
Believe me when I tell you. I’m not the only one who’s lost all faith in “institutional” thinking.
And is that “holier-than-thou” attitude that turns intelligent people off and sends them looking for alternatives.
I agree there are quacks out there, of all types, traditional and alternative. I have stated that above, as you may read. It is up to us the patients to choose and no one should be taken to court over that final choice.
When I go, I know that it was me who made the choice. And am very ok with that. At least no one forced me to submit to a therapy that one day we’ll look back and consider as barbaric as blood-letting.
When “doctors” like you open up your mind, start listening to your patients and treating them like human beings and not as “cases”, perhaps you’ll gain more credibility.
Thank God not all of you are the same. There are great doctors out there who listen and respect the patient. You are humans, not gods. Don’t forget that.
Oh! One more thing MD in Tx.
As per article submitted to the NY Times earlier this year, by one of your peers, who’s a president-elect of the American Medical Association, the #1 killer is NOT cancer.
It is heart disease.
“Cardiovascular disease remains the No. 1 killer of Americans, and the scientific evidence linking a lowered salt intake to a reduced risk for heart disease is overwhelming.”
http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/no-index/news-events/new-york-times-salt.shtml
I’m done talking about this.
Have a good night everyone!
I hate what I am about to say… I think in this case the judge made the right call. I know I was just here a few days ago saying how I let Heaven essentially help with her medical treatment within reason. (She can’t choose nothing as an option, and if she starts to loose her hair we will most likely have a fight about the chemo.) However, after reading all I can find about this case, I learned the child not being able to read is because of a learning disability, and the parents are allowing this child to choose his treatment.
Now I am all for parental rights, but I would say it falls into neglecting a child when they allow a child that can’t understand what is happening to him to choose his medical care… So I am on the side of the state…
I don’t want to belabor this either. But are you an advocate of child abuse? Surely not, but these parents are arguably putting their child at considerably more risk than not using a car seat. This kid is going to die in a hotel somewhere with his crazy mom, who is now a fugitive from authorities, and she can’t possibly present to any hospital to get him help now without revealing her whereabouts. I suspect you’d be quite scandalized if she was home schooling this kid and never taught him how to read. Letting him die is worse?
And as far as this kid’s free will in all this, put yourself in the mind of a 13 year-old. Of course he’s going to agree with his parents, even if they weren’t aggressively biasing his choices behind the scenes. He’s dying, he’s terrified, and this is his mom and dad. How could he possibly say he wanted chemo in a court of law without shaming his parents in front of the world? He’s trapped. I’m sure he thinks his mom is being his hero here, but when he’s in his final moments, he’ll be left feeling more betrayed and confused than any of us can imagine. It’s all just so horrible. I think these parents are both mentally ill.
Regarding holistic therapies, my attitude is certainly not “holier than thou”. My intention is to speak as a patient advocate; I do a lot of research into holistic therapies, and I’ve tried some myself. I just bristle at seeing people being manipulated when it comes to matters of life and death.
When it comes to acupuncture and meditation, I think those are useful adjuncts to treating illness. But herbal remedies are just chemicals like any other; just because they came from a plant doesn’t make them any less toxic than a commercially-produced pharmaceutical. One could argue that the most contemporary therapeutics, which are designed to only bind to a specific target in the body, are actually quite cleaner in their effects than taking unprocessed herbs, which can have myriad effects on the body–some quite unpredictable and undesirable.
It’s become fashionable to view pharmaceutical companies and physicians as self-serving and corrupt, and to posture holistic providers as honest healers. Sometimes this is true, and sometimes the reverse is true. Remember that holistic providers have to pay the rent like everybody else, and they can make whatever claims they like without anywhere near the same fear of malpractice suits or censure from licensing authorities. And do these practitioners think they’re any less infallible than a conventional doctor? Many of them make very bloated claims, and they often make a killing off of sick, vulnerable people, who pay them in cash. And nobody keeps track of their treatment outcomes. Holistic therapies aren’t to blame here, but practitioners like the ones this crazy couple are taking their kid to give alternative medicine a bad name. They run a racket.
I hate to close this way, because I have considerable fear that I’ll be labeled condescending, or worse, insensitive. But since this is a discussion of matters of life and death, I’ll take the risk:
Remember–although having endured cancer in yourself or a loved one might give you the emotional authority to counsel others on your experience, it does not give you the medical authority to guide others’ treatment. The web is full of people out there who have been traumatized by this or that, who want to “warn” others about their experience. Often, you find that these people got perfectly reasonable care, but didn’t have satisfying outcomes either because their condition wasn’t treatable, or because they didn’t adhere to it. They’re looking to find a villain in the piece to blame for losing control of their health, and the convenient target is their doctor, who definitely didn’t give them cancer.
The bottom line is that good doctors, whether holistic or traditional, don’t make treatment decisions based on one person’s experience, they make them based on data culled from large numbers of patients who were studied under very controlled conditions. Those studies aren’t perfect, but when you’re deciding what’s best for you or your child, they’re the best we’ve got.
I’ll leave this alone for now. I’ll pray for this child, and I’ll pray for his parents, who evidently believe they’re in the right. Thanks to everyone for listening.
This is such a difficult question to answer… does the gov’t have the right to force parents to get the medical treatment the gov’t thinks is right for their children? In most ways, I don’t agree with the gov’t stepping in on families, but most agree that if a child is being beaten, molested or otherwise abused by their parent, the gov’t should step in on behalf of the child. We believe this because the child doesn’t typically have a voice in those situations. We even go as far as requiring parents to insure their child is educated in the basics, and if it isn’t happening, the gov’t can step in and force the parents to put the child in public school. I homeschool… I’m quire familiar with the law in several states (it varies), and I work hard to insure my child is well socialized (girl scouts, dance, soccer, church, etc.) and well educated. I even go so far as to teach her on subjects I’m not required by law to teach (arts in particular), and she will be graduating early with college credits under her belt. It’s my responsibility, and I’m happy to take it on. As long as I show that I’m being responsible, nobody bothers me. I’m allowed to handle my child’s education the way I see most fit for her, and the gov’t stays out of my way. If I were to decide that reading was unnecessary, however, the gov’t would step in and most would agree that it would be a necessary move on behalf of my child.
When does refusing a child traditional treatment become abuse? The parents are seeking treatment, just not the type that most think is the correct treatment. Does that amount to abuse or neglect? Where do the parent’s rights end and gov’t rights begin? How does the gov’t step in on something like this without it becoming a slippery slope?
I’m always concerned when the gov’t steps in on things like this. I was really bothered when all those children were taken from the ‘rogue’ Mormon compound not too long ago. I was bothered even more when it was discovered that the call for help that they based their move on was a hoax, and they still didn’t want to return the children. At that point, out gov’t was basing its decisions on assumptions of what must be going on in that compound, and that they knew what was better, even if it meant stepping on people’s freedom of religion. What if the gov’t starts stepping in on other, more common, religions and telling people what to do? Were they right in making assumptions, or should they have found evidence first?
There is a very fine line there.
You cannot simplify this topic, but I want to thank all the posters here for being respectful about a very touchy subject.
As for NYC-Survivor, I asked her for more info, to share her story, because I believe the more information people have, the better. We are all “collecting data,” too, just on an individual basis. So the following remark was unfair to her as I was the one who asked: “But campaigning on the web for others to follow your unproven, much riskier path, just so you can feel more secure in your choice, is quite irresponsible in my opinion. You might want to see what’s beyond the horizon before you encourage others to follow you over the cliff.” I think NYC-Survivor stayed pretty neutral considering I gave her an open door.
Also, I don’t think that “It’s become fashionable to view pharmaceutical companies and physicians as self-serving and corrupt, and to posture holistic providers as honest healers.” I think people are generally becoming more cynical about all information.
Medicine is also subjective. It’s a lot of guesswork, whether it’s “natural” or traditional medicine. The physician makes an educated guess. You and I know that. But doctors are rigorously trained and they have information and experience that the patient does not. That’s why doctors and patients should work as a team (as several here alluded to).
I’m not condoning the mother’s refusal for chemo. I just think she has her limitations, and she must be suffering as well. No mother wants to see her child die…or go through chemo.
Thanks for this discussion, all.
I think there’s just one more that should be made about this situation… Daniel had ALREADY gone through a round of chemo. So, the parents and their child gave chemo a try and are not simply rejecting traditional treatment out of hand. That makes their decision and educated choice, based not only on their opinions and beliefes but also on their personal experience and their son’s experience/reactions with chemo.
We just can’t get carried away by numbers here… I know a little boy Cody who just had a marrow transplant. His cancer would not go into remission, and the doctors gave his family two choices: a) take him home to die or b) attempt a transplant during active cancer. They chose the transplant. Want to know the odds? he had a 10% chance of surviving for ONE year only. So far he has been doing great, but who other than the parents were qualified to take that chance? Transplant and radiation is terribly painful and scary. Do we want a situation where the government will decide what outcome to risk with ourselves and our children? Will we end up without the ability to even choose, based on what the government’s criteria are? (and who really thinks that any doctor or government official will care more about a child than the parents?)
It is unfortunately impossible to guarantee that mistakes won’t be made. There are circumstances in which people make the wrong decision and our kids pay the price. That is reality. And sometimes we will never know whether or not we made mistakes, what might have been had we chosen differently. I would rather make the mistake with my child, than an “objective” person who has no personal incentive to care about my child more than anyone else in the world as I do.
Natalie you do bring up some good points. It really isn’t fair for any of us to make judgments. My thoughts still remain the same, and based upon the evidence that I have seen I still side with the state. However, I would agree with you (and did before I read more) in most cases…
Thank goodness my judgments are just my own thoughts, and I am not responsible for deciding anything in this case though, as easy as it is to give my opinion here, being in the position would make everything different, and I do note and respect that…