Minn. Judge Rules Teen Must See Cancer Doctor

Jiro said:
oh? so you do know what was being said between parents and the doctors?
Click to expand...

Where exactly did I say that? Stop trying to add meaning or implication to my posts that is not there, nor is it intended.
 
Jiro said:
again - what would happen if the child die as the result of chemotherapy as ordered by judge?
Click to expand...

What if a frog had wings? He wouldn't bump his ass everytime he tries to fly.

Stick to the facts and stop with the "what ifs" and the misquided hypothesis in an attempt cloud the issue.
 
jillio said:
What if a frog had wings? He wouldn't bump his ass everytime he tries to fly.

Stick to the facts and stop with the "what ifs" and the misquided hypothesis in an attempt cloud the issue.
Click to expand...

Again - let me spell it out for you. Daniel Hauser MAY survive after chemotherapy. Sure that's great and wonderful but it's not a 100% guarantee. So what would happen if the child die as the result of chemotherapy as ordered by judge?

It's a very valid, simple question.
 
Jiro said:
Again - let me spell it out for you. Daniel Hauser MAY survive after chemotherapy. Sure that's great and wonderful but it's not a 100% guarantee. So what would happen if the child die as the result of chemotherapy as ordered by judge?

It's a very valid, simple question.
Click to expand...

Nope. It's a 90% chance that he will survive with chemotherapy. Each day that treatment is denied, that chance goes down a little bit more.

There is a 10% chance that he will survive less than 5 years as a result of the cancer returning and metastisizing.

There is a neglible chance that he will die as a result of the chemotherapy.

Come on, Jiro. You claim to be a math whiz. Look at the numbers, and then tell me, which constitutes the more benefit with less risk.
 
jillio said:
Where exactly did I say that? Stop trying to add meaning or implication to my posts that is not there, nor is it intended.
Click to expand...

1. you keep saying the parents are abusive to Daniel.
2. the parents refused to continue with chemotherapy
3. doctors reported them for medical neglect

Now here's the problem. We don't know what was being discussed between doctors and parents in order to determine if the parents' refusal to continue chemotherapy met the legal requirements of Informed Consent.

and I do not believe they are because they have 7 children and they have no history of child abuse. The doctors stepped out of their bounds. The judge stepped out of his bound.
 
jillio said:
Nope. It's a 90% chance that he will survive with chemotherapy. Each day that treatment is denied, that chance goes down a little bit more.

There is a 10% chance that he will survive less than 5 years as a result of the cancer returning and metastisizing.

There is a neglible chance that he will die as a result of the chemotherapy.

Come on, Jiro. You claim to be a math whiz. Look at the numbers, and then tell me, which constitutes the more benefit with less risk.
Click to expand...

So... what would happen if the child die as the result of chemotherapy as ordered by judge? Are you telling me that it's IMPOSSIBLE that he will die as the result of chemotherapy?
 
Jiro said:
1. you keep saying the parents are abusive to Daniel.
2. the parents refused to continue with chemotherapy
3. doctors reported them for medical neglect

Now here's the problem. We don't know what was being discussed between doctors and parents in order to determine if the parents' refusal to continue chemotherapy met the legal requirements of Informed Consent.

and I do not believe they are because they have 7 children and they have no history of child abuse. The doctors stepped out of their bounds. The judge stepped out of his bound.
Click to expand...

That doesn't have anything to do with the case, Jiro.

The doctors followed the law.

The judge followed the law.

The judge has consulted with both doctors and parents. The judge has, at his disposal, the medical records of this child. Included in that is the informed consent forms, and notes regarding any verbal communications between doctors and parents.

I did not, in any post, say that these parents were guilty of abuse. I said they were guilty of medical neglect. Those are two different charges.
 
Jiro said:
So... what would happen if the child die as the result of chemotherapy as ordered by judge? Are you telling me that it's IMPOSSIBLE that he will die as the result of chemotherapy?
Click to expand...

Continuing to ask the question in different format is not going to get you a different answer than the ones I have given before, Jiro. Stop playing the "what if" game and stick to the facts.
 
jillio said:
Continuing to ask the question in different format is not going to get you a different answer than the ones I have given before, Jiro. Stop playing the "what if" game and stick to the facts.
Click to expand...

medical situation is facts? since when? Sounds like a 100% surefire guarantee! I guess the "fact" didn't work out for naisho's deceased relative as assured by his/her doctors....
 
Jiro said:
medical situation is facts? since when? Sounds like a 100% surefire guarantee! I guess the "fact" didn't work out for naisho's deceased relative as assured by his/her doctors....
Click to expand...

How do you account for my mother Jiro? She was able to survive 5 months thanks to chemo.
 
Hear Again said:
How do you account for my mother Jiro? She was able to survive 5 months thanks to chemo.
Click to expand...

and how do you account for naisho's relative who didn't benefit from chemotherapy? Didn't you just acknowledge that chemotherapy doesn't save every life?
 
Jiro said:
medical situation is facts? since when? Sounds like a 100% surefire guarantee! I guess the "fact" didn't work out for naisho's deceased relative as assured by his/her doctors....
Click to expand...

Yes, the facts are the this child's cancer started into remission when he was taking chemo, and it came out of remission and is now life threatening under his parent's herbal treatments.

The fact is, this form of cancer has been shown to have a 90% cure rate when treated with a specific chemotherapy.

Good luck at finding any 100% guarantees in this life, Jiro. I'm much older than you and I haven't found one yet. The best you get is odds. And 90% odd of cure rate beats anything else available.
 
Jiro said:
and how do you account for naisho's relative who didn't benefit from chemotherapy? Didn't you just acknowledge that chemotherapy doesn't save every life?
Click to expand...

To account for that, we would have to have all of the information surrounding the case. I doubt seriously that naisho's relative was a 13 year old boy with no other health complications suffering from Hodgin's Lymphoma with a rapidly growing thoractic tumor.
 
KarissaMann05 said:
No, chemo is not always 100% successfully.

You, we, and I do not know if the boy could survive the chemo...
Click to expand...

But we all know that he will die from the cancer without treatment, and has a 90% of surviving it with treatment.
 
KarissaMann05 said:
Correct, but you never know for sure.
Click to expand...

You don't know for sure that you will be alive 15 minutes from now. But there is a better chance you will than there is a chance you won't. Which chance do you want to take?
 
jillio said:
But we all know that he will die from the cancer without treatment, and has a 90% of surviving it with treatment.
Click to expand...

but we all don't know if this 13 years old child could handle 5 more chemotherapy sessions. Like I said - do you acknowledge the fact that chemotherapy is not the ONLY option on the table?
 
Back
Top