Minn. Judge Rules Teen Must See Cancer Doctor

Whoa, ten pages to this thread so far! I am shaking my head at the parents' stupidity because once the state gets its claws into you, heaven and earth will have to be moved to get extracted. It is not a comparison, but I have seen low-income mothers with six children sleeping in a living room. Do I report her? Nope, because once the state social services get into the act, it can be next-to-impossible to satisfy all requirements to keep the children together as family. (For example, the mother may be required to get a bedroom for each child.) But if I see a child's life threatened by the parents, then I would certainly let the proper authorities know.
 
Jiro said:
there's nothing to disagree. you got the sequence wrong.

1. Parents said to doctor - "I don't want any more chemotherapy"
2. Doctors charged them with medical neglect

that's the point!!!
Click to expand...

1. Child has been diagnosed with fatal cancer.
2. Child begins chemotherapy and cancer begins to remiss.
3. Parents refuse to continue with chemotherapy.
4. Parents attempt to treat child with herbs using information located on the internet.
5. Cancer becomes active, and tumor increases in size, putting child's life in danger.
6. Parents still refuse to continue chemotherapy.
7. Doctors report parents for suspected medical neglect.
8. State of Minnesota charges parents with medical neglect, and orders child to be examined by pediatric oncologist.
9. Examinations confirms life threatening condition, and worsening of cancer.
10. Parents then claim "religious objection."
11. Rather than submit to life saving treatment for her child, mother takes child and leaves.
12. Mother is charged with a felony.

You omitted several pertinent points in your sequence.
 
jillio said:
1. Child has been diagnosed with fatal cancer.
2. Child begins chemotherapy and cancer begins to remiss.
3. Parents refuse to continue with chemotherapy.
4. Parents attempt to treat child with herbs using information located on the internet.
5. Cancer becomes active, and tumor increases in size, putting child's life in danger.
6. Parents still refuse to continue chemotherapy.
7. Doctors report parents for suspected medical neglect.
8. State of Minnesota charges parents with medical neglect, and orders child to be examined by pediatric oncologist.
9. Examinations confirms life threatening condition, and worsening of cancer.
10. Parents then claim "religious objection."
11. Rather than submit to life saving treatment for her child, mother takes child and leaves.
12. Mother is charged with a felony.

You omitted several pertinent points in your sequence.
Click to expand...

This is local news to me. I have been in the town several times. It is just over an hour away. This is THE NEWS here. I have been force-fed this story for days.
"Jiro" and I did not agree. I then bowed out, because we can keep hammering away, but my mind is made up on this. Maybe the next issue, we will agree with each other. I dunno, but here my mind will not be swayed. If something were to come out that I was not aware of, I can be certain that my local media will cover it.
 
saywhatkid said:
This is local news to me. I have been in the town several times. It is just over an hour away. This is THE NEWS here. I have been force-fed this story for days.
"Jiro" and I did not agree. I then bowed out, because we can keep hammering away, but my mind is made up on this. Maybe the next issue, we will agree with each other. I dunno, but here my mind will not be swayed. If something were to come out that I was not aware of, I can be certain that my local media will cover it.
Click to expand...

I perfectly understand and yes we can agree to disagree. While this is the local news to you, I'm gravely concerned for the outcome of this case because the legal precedent of this case can affect us on national level.
 
Jiro said:
I perfectly understand and yes we can agree to disagree. While this is the local news to you, I'm gravely concerned for the outcome of this case because the legal precedent of this case can affect us on national level.
Click to expand...

Yes, we do agree on this. Hopefully, each case of this nature is handled the best way. No way do I feel this is the correct decision by the court for every case of this nature.
 
saywhatkid said:
This is local news to me. I have been in the town several times. It is just over an hour away. This is THE NEWS here. I have been force-fed this story for days.
"Jiro" and I did not agree. I then bowed out, because we can keep hammering away, but my mind is made up on this. Maybe the next issue, we will agree with each other. I dunno, but here my mind will not be swayed. If something were to come out that I was not aware of, I can be certain that my local media will cover it.
Click to expand...

Agreed. It was obvious from your posts that you had been inundated with the story.

And there is nothing that I have seen to date, either, that will change my mind regarding the circumstances of this story. What I find distrubing is the ways that some are attempting to justify the unjustifiable actions of these parents.
 
Jiro said:
I perfectly understand and yes we can agree to disagree. While this is the local news to you, I'm gravely concerned for the outcome of this case because the legal precedent of this case can affect us on national level.
Click to expand...

Yes, the outcome can affect us on a national level. We can either set a precedent of refusing to accept that a parent has a right to neglect a child to the degree that death is the result, or we can set a precedent of not accepting that any parent has the right to contribute to their child's death. And then we can continue to decide each case on an individual level, just as is done now.
 
I would not be surprise when court will order all deaf children to get CI against parents' wishes. Just alike this kid.

I read in other forum and I understand why his mother made the decision. They want to do natural way to fight cancer instead force chemotherapy on her son.
 
This case has absolutely nothing to do with CI. It has to do with parents choosing to provide alternative care that is resulting in this child's death. It is about their refusal to provide for this child's basic needs. It is about them putting their choice ahead of this child's right to live.
 
jillio said:
This case has absolutely nothing to do with CI. It has to do with parents choosing to provide alternative care that is resulting in this child's death. It is about their refusal to provide for this child's basic needs. It is about them putting their choice ahead of this child's right to live.
Click to expand...

:gpost: :gpost:
 
jillio said:
This case has absolutely nothing to do with CI. It has to do with parents choosing to provide alternative care that is resulting in this child's death. It is about their refusal to provide for this child's basic needs. It is about them putting their choice ahead of this child's right to live.
Click to expand...
It has to do about who controlling parents. Yes it is similar with CI in the future. I am against chemo because it did not save the lives of million so dont tell me that the chemo will help this boy. I am standing for parents' choice not you or us or judge. Doctors are full of BS. IHMO.
 
jazzy said:
It has to do about who controlling parents. Yes it is similar with CI in the future. I am against chemo because it did not save the lives of million so dont tell me that the chemo will help this boy. I am standing for parents' choice not you or us or judge. Doctors are full of BS. IHMO.
Click to expand...

Chemo happens to save many lives. If it were not for the chemo my mother received for her pancreatic cancer, she would not have survived 5 months following her diagnosis.

If you expect chemo to "save the lives of millions," you are being unrealistic. Chemo doesn't save every life, but it does save the lives of many.

I hope you are never diagnosed with cancer. Cancer is a relentless disease that slowly eats away at you mentally and physically.

I bet you would feel differently about chemo and doctors in general if you saw someone you love in constant pain and vomiting blood on a daily basis like I did.

People who have cancer should not be denied the right to have appropriate treatment. Saying otherwise is callous and cruel.
 
Hear Again said:
Chemo happens to save many lives. If it were not for the chemo my mother received for her pancreatic cancer, she would not have survived 5 months following her diagnosis.

If you expect chemo to "save the lives of millions," you are being unrealistic. Chemo doesn't save every life, but it does save the lives of many.

I hope you are never diagnosed with cancer. Cancer is a relentless disease that slowly eats away at you mentally and physically.

I bet you would feel differently about chemo and doctors in general if you saw someone you love in constant pain and vomiting blood on a daily basis like I did.

People who have cancer should not be denied the right to have appropriate treatment. Saying otherwise is callous and cruel.
Click to expand...

:gpost:
Ditto for my mother. She's the only member of my family to survive breast cancer. My grandmother Price and my great aunt Helen (my grandmother's sister) both died of breast cancer. When I found out my mother had cancer, it was the worst day of my life.
 
deafskeptic said:
:gpost:
Ditto for my mother. She's the only member of my family to survive breast cancer. My grandmother Price and my great aunt Helen (my grandmother's sister) both died of breast cancer. When I found out my mother had cancer, it was the worst day of my life.
Click to expand...

:hug: I'm sorry for your losses deafskeptic, but am glad your mother is continuing to do well. I hope that remains the case for a long time to come.

I felt the same way after my mother was diagnosed. I was in denial for awhile and kept telling her to attend a support group for cancer survivors. Her response was "I have a terminal illness and am dying! Don't you understand that?!" I gave her a hug and apologized for what I said. It was then that the reality of her diagnosis really sunk in. I continued praying every day and if truth be told, my prayers were answered in two ways: 1. My mother survived 5 months which is the longest period of time someone with pancreatic cancer can survive following diagnosis and 2. My mother passed away in her sleep which is how she always wanted to leave this world. She also passed away exactly 7 days after she told me "Lord, I can't do this anymore. I want to go Home."

My mother died a week before Christmas in 2004 and I still miss her terribly to this day. I'll never forget how she told me that all she wanted was to live long enough to see one more Christmas which was her favorite holiday.

May my dear mother rest in peace.
 
Someone related to me had died as a result of chemotherapy rapidly compromising his immune system, even though the doctors kept recommending it. We followed through on the doctor's suggestions, and they gave statistics such as that he would likely survive 80% past five years.
I saw him grow weaker, and weaker every time I went to visit him after each round. After he began chemotherapy sessions, his lifespan deteriorated rapidly and he did not live past 5 months since starting treatment.

In the end, chemotherapy did not even save him despite the doctors kept pushing to go through with it. If anything, it seemed like it robbed him to live an otherwise normal way until the larynx cancer would take over him. Chemotherapy made him, extremely weak. This is anecdotal to my own experience.


I understand that it can save other people in other cases, and I can also see why others see that chemotherapy isn't always the solution for everything. Ultimately, the way I see it with both factors applied.. It is totally up to Daniel Hauser's choice himself, although his mom is most likely coordinating with him to make those decisions.
 
I think the choice to have chemo should be left up to the person who has cancer whether they be a child or an adult. In my mother's case, her oncologist was realistic about what she could expect to receive from chemo. When he asked my mother if she wanted to be told how long she would live, she said no. She told me that she would rather continue living life because God would take her Home when He was ready.
 
jillio said:
Agreed. It was obvious from your posts that you had been inundated with the story.

And there is nothing that I have seen to date, either, that will change my mind regarding the circumstances of this story. What I find distrubing is the ways that some are attempting to justify the unjustifiable actions of these parents.
Click to expand...

jillio said:
This case has absolutely nothing to do with CI. It has to do with parents choosing to provide alternative care that is resulting in this child's death. It is about their refusal to provide for this child's basic needs. It is about them putting their choice ahead of this child's right to live.
Click to expand...

you still haven't answered my question. what if the child died as the result of chemotherapy?
 
I don't think it's right for anyone to determine what kind of treatment (if any) someone with cancer should have. It isn't their life, their body or their choice and they aren't the ones fighting this disease on a daily basis. If truth be told, I think people who try to influence the treatment decisions of someone with cancer are selfish and only thinking of themselves. No one should be allowed to determine the appropriate course of treatment (or lack thereof) except for the cancer patient and their doctors.
 
Hear Again said:
I don't think it's right for anyone to determine what kind of treatment (if any) someone with cancer should have. It isn't their life, their body or their choice and they aren't the ones fighting this disease on a daily basis. If truth be told, I think people who try to influence the treatment decisions of someone with cancer are selfish and only thinking of themselves. No one should be allowed to determine the appropriate course of treatment (or lack thereof) except for the cancer patient and their doctors.
Click to expand...

which is precisely why I'm very appalled at the outcome of this case. How dare the judge and doctor dictate what is good for patient or not. I understand it's outrageous of parents to look up the medicine from internet but that's not the point.

The very core thing of this issue is the government dictating the term for patient. Can you imagine them preventing me from wanting to do alternative medicine in Korea for my cancer child? There are several ways to treat the cancer. Chemotherapy is not the only option.
 
Back
Top