Boy's family refuses cancer treatment

[Holmes]

I'm sure everyone has heard the story. I wanna see what people think.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, for me, I know people have their beliefs, but in my opinion, this kinda borders on criminal negligence. I mean, herbs and Jesus won't cure cancer. If I were to say that starving my child is the right thing to do because it is my belief, that'd be criminal of me, and I think that's basically what this family is doing to their child.

I kinda feel sorry for him.

[tmthforu94]

The kid, and his family, has been brainwashed by some idiot who does not care about the health of a human. The child needs this treatment to stay alive. Do whatever it takes to give it to him.

[Keystone Phil]

It's horrible and I think that the child ought to be treated but if he's denying the treatment, I really don't want to force it on him. Then we get to the question, "Well, is he really denying the treatment because he doesn't want it or is he just saying it because his parents don't want him getting it?" I worry that too many are assuming the latter and now think it's the government's job to do what's in his "best interest" despite his wishes.

[Alcon]

Parents' right to medical proxy ends when it is to the clear detriment of their child.  That having been said...if the kid himself believes this too, the question becomes harder.  I have enough problems with a parent dragging their 17-year-old (as the law provides) kicking and screaming to get the medical treatment of their choice, carte blanche.  The state doing the same?  Yikes.

Brainwashed parents, brainwashed kid.  Loser situation and a moral violation all-around.

[Verily]

It's horrible and I think that the child ought to be treated but if he's denying the treatment, I really don't want to force it on him. Then we get to the question, "Well, is he really denying the treatment because he doesn't want it or is he just saying it because his parents don't want him getting it?" I worry that too many are assuming the latter and now think it's the government's job to do what's in his "best interest" despite his wishes.

He's only 13. He doesn't have a say in these decisions, frankly.

[Holmes]

He's only 13. He doesn't have a say in these decisions, frankly.

I agree. I don't even know how serious this kid thinks it is, but if he wants to run away from treatment, I don't think he must be too worried. This kid was a pre-teen just a year ago, and I don't think people in that age group are of the right mind and maturity to make life or death decisions.

[Keystone Phil]

It's horrible and I think that the child ought to be treated but if he's denying the treatment, I really don't want to force it on him. Then we get to the question, "Well, is he really denying the treatment because he doesn't want it or is he just saying it because his parents don't want him getting it?" I worry that too many are assuming the latter and now think it's the government's job to do what's in his "best interest" despite his wishes.

He's only 13. He doesn't have a say in these decisions, frankly.

I'm still not comfortable with the government forcing medical treatment on people.

[Platypus]

It's sad, but if it is a shared wish of the parents and, independently,  the child, and doesn't harm anyone else it must be allowed.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I support forcing him to get the treatment. He can't refuse it until he's 18.

[Platypus]

I support forcing him to get the treatment. He can't refuse it until he's 18.

Fascist.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Lots of those pregnant and "married" teenage girls in that Mormon cult probably consented too. Being brainwashed by parents in cults does not legitimize things.

[7,052,770]

I support forcing him to get the treatment. He can't refuse it until he's 18.

This.  Also, while he's in the hospital, his parents should have to take some parenting classes before he's released back into their custody.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

It's horrible and I think that the child ought to be treated but if he's denying the treatment, I really don't want to force it on him. Then we get to the question, "Well, is he really denying the treatment because he doesn't want it or is he just saying it because his parents don't want him getting it?" I worry that too many are assuming the latter and now think it's the government's job to do what's in his "best interest" despite his wishes.

He's only 13. He doesn't have a say in these decisions, frankly.

I'm still not comfortable with the government forcing medical treatment on people.

Neither am I.  I'm really on the fence here.  If they can force this seemingly "routine" type of treatment, can they force something that might be "experimental" on others?  I don't know. 

[Saxwsylvania]

I guess a point could be made that we're all brainwashed to a certain extent.

[MaxQue]

I have enough problems with a parent dragging their 17-year-old (as the law provides) kicking and screaming to get the medical treatment of their choice, carte blanche.

In Quebec, a parent has no say in a medical decision when the kid reach 14. They call that the medical majority.

[afleitch]

I think the parents should explain fully and in great theological detail why it goes against their religious beliefs. If they can't, or its b/s - he gets the treatment.

[Platypus]

Lots of those pregnant and "married" teenage girls in that Mormon cult probably consented too. Being brainwashed by parents in cults does not legitimize things.

Sometimes life is sh**t and people get brainwashed. It's deeply unfortunate and should be avoided.

At the same time, government should never, ever have ultimate control over the ending of one of its citizens lives by intervening against their will - whether that's something like this case or through capital punishment, or in any other way - unless the lives of others at at risk. In this case, the only life at risk is the boy's, and he and his family have made a decision. Would I stress the effectiveness of treatement? Sure. But to force it is Fascist, by any definition of the word.

[Ban my account ffs!]

This is a tough situation.  Denying treatment will ultimately lead to his death... so the parents are being negligent on that part.  At the same time, I believe each person (or their parents in this case) has the right to decide whether they want treatment or not.

The government should not be directly intervening if it is against both the child's and parents' wills.

If the child does want treatment and the parents object, I believe the government has a right to intervene, mostly because that choice lies with the individual in question, no matter the age.

[??????????]

They say the boy in this case is mentally impaired. That changes the situation IMHO.

[Mint]

I support forcing him to get the treatment. He can't refuse it until he's 18.

For once BRTD is entirely correct. There's no dilemma here as far as I'm concerned. You have the right to believe what you want, but the second your belief harms or directly endangers another person that right is negated. If they object charge them with negligence and take him away. Now if he was a bit older and not under their care my opinion might be different.

[tmthforu94]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_forced_chemo

The parents have decided to let their son undergo chemo.

[nclib]

If the child does want treatment and the parents object, I believe the government has a right to intervene, mostly because that choice lies with the individual in question, no matter the age.

Definitely. And if there's any doubt, they should err on the side of treating the child.

[Reluctant Republican]

I’ve heard some compelling arguments to allow the child to avoid getting the treatment. Specifically, the actual damage chemo does. And I’m in no rush to demonize natural healings. It makes sense to me that our for profit health care system would have a stake in continuing to perpetuate chemo therapy as the only reliable treatment for cancer. For all we know, maybe there is a natural plant that can cure it.

This being said, I think he should get the treatment, and am glad he is. In cases like this, with such a high survival rate being related to chemotherapy, it’s probably for the best.  Now if he only had a 10% chance of survival with chemo I could understand the parents refusal to allow him to go through it, especially considering the dangers. But here, the benefits outweigh the dangers it appears.  I still don’t like seeing him forced into it. Frankly, the family does strike me as cult like. But that’s not my call.

[dead0man]

I'm still not comfortable with the government forcing medical treatment on people.

AYE!

[Associate Justice PiT]

I'm still not comfortable with the government forcing medical treatment on people.

AYE!

     Pretty much. This case is unfortunate, but it is not our place to force treatment on the child in question.