Boy's family refuses cancer treatment

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

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.

This child is not mentally capable of making decisions. As I stated earlier, this particular child has developmental disabilities. That changes the ballgame.

[dead0man]

Maybe.  If he was in the gifted program you'd be ok with him and his family saying no?  What if he was a normal 16 year old (I know he isn't 16)?

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

Maybe.  If he was in the gifted program you'd be ok with him and his family saying no?  What if he was a normal 16 year old (I know he isn't 16)?

More opposed to the state stepping in but I'd still be on the fence. It's a tough issue really.

[Lunar]

13 is pretty much a borderline age on the issue.

I'd at least be tempted to, if the law allowed, pull him aside from his parents and have him spend a few days in the hospital educating him about the anatomical facts of the disease and what it entails.  And, if I were a doctor there, I'd be tempted to try to explain to the parents why their position is wrong.

I don't know beyond that.

I'll let the professionals decide

[Platypus]

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.

especially when no-one else is being directly effected. The government can step in at a limited level if its in society's best interests, but not for an individual.

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

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.

especially when no-one else is being directly effected. The government can step in at a limited level if its in society's best interests, but not for an individual.

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.

This child is not mentally capable of making decisions. As I stated earlier, this particular child has developmental disabilities. That changes the ballgame.

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

[Platypus]

See the very last bit of your statement?

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

See the very last bit of your statement?

What? Opinion? Yes it is and a very good one at that. If we allow parents to let their children die because the children are to mentally impaired to understand their dire situation then are we any better then those in history who wanted mentally impaired folks culled?

[nclib]

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.

As I said earlier, I totally agree with your last paragraph. As for the child and parents both not wanting it, this may be acceptable on some situations but not of this severity. I also find it repulsive that a minor with his/her parents permission can't purchase a Playboy, cigarette, beer, attend an R rated movie, etc., but that many people on this thread don't want the government to intervene here where the consequences are far greater.