Forced Cancer Treatment

By
Published/Last Modified on Wednesday, May 20, 2009 5:16 AM CDT

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,520690,00.html

 

The link above is related to a story about parents who are being brought to court to determine if they are fit parents for their 13 year old who has cancer.

Advertisement
They have a 13 year old who has cancer and have abided by the wishes of their child to not undergo chemotherapy,but an alternative treatment. The child's doctor decided that that wasn't the right decision so he took them to court for a judge to decided whether or not the child needs to have chemotherapy and radiation. The mother now has a warrant for her arrest because she ran with the child. WHO stated he did NOT want any more treatements.

I have a problem with this.  It is not that Doctor's or a judges decision to make. If the child needed braces and parents decided not to pay for them can the orthodontist take them to court. Can a pedatrician bring a parent to court because they don't want to give their child allergy shots and instead brings them to a chiropractor.

Now I know that cancer is life threating and these are not, but it still is a choice made by that family. It's not like they have not looked into all options.

Chemotherapy and Radiation are just as bad if not sometimes worse than the cancer. It sterilizes, causes bone damage, damages the immune system etc. etc. If there are other options out there , which there are, that can give the same results but in a healthier way --why not let these people explore those options. Who is this DOCTOR or JUDGE to say they can't make their own choice.

It's not like these people don't love their child, otherwise they wouldn't be fighting so hard for what he wants.

This is just another violation of our rights.

Copyright © 2009 The Daily Iberian

Comments

    To Mr. Logic wrote on May 31, 2009 9:15 AM:

    " Your childish rantings have given you no ground. I agree that the government has no right to step into the peoples private decisions. Especially since they (the government) have expressed an interest in euthanasia. "

    MRS wrote on May 31, 2009 7:58 AM:

    " To Phyllis, I wholeheartedly agree with you and would hope that you will no longer be pulled in to a foolish debate. Cancer is a horrible disease and all of those who are on the backs of these parents' like a pack of wolves have not walked in the shoes of these parents' so it's easy to make their calls. God Bless you for your Compassion. "

    first hand view wrote on May 29, 2009 1:36 PM:

    " I feel in a cancer that has a high chance of being cured, chemo should be done. I also have two other experiences to share. My mother-in-law, age 66, had cancer and was given 6 months w/o chemo and 18 months with. She did chemo and lived miserably for 9 months. She died weighing a mere 64 pounds and suffered immensely until the end. My cousin's wife, age 69, was given 3 months w/o chemo and 12 months with. She died peacefully after 4 months. She was up with her children, cooking gumbo, until a week before her death. "

    Mr. R wrote on May 28, 2009 11:43 AM:

    " I dont like the idea of the State or Government telling or forcing citizens to do anything more than the next guy. But in this specific case, cancer is a serious life threat and the best known cure and or something to slow down its process is medical treatment of cemo and radiation. I dont think a person should be allowed to refuse this treatment for a child to try vitamins, time is short when you have cancer. I know I wouldnt take this risk with my child. "

    Logic wrote on May 27, 2009 2:25 PM:

    " "No logical argument"

    Premise1: Experts agree Daniel will probably live if he has chemotherapy.
    Premise2: Daniel's parents denied expert opinion and refused to treat him.
    Conclusion: Without intervention, Daniel would have probably died.

    "no manipulation nor admittance to validity to his moot argument"

    Circular reasoning at it's finest. It's like saying pigs fly because the person arguing against flying pigs can't admit that pigs fly.

    "not mad, he challenged, challenge was met and conquered."

    Conquered? You think this is some glorious spiritual warfare where you're fighting some evil enemy? "

    To Go Prophet wrote on May 26, 2009 6:22 PM:

    " Your very last statement was the only valid statement.

    "Your argument is based on chemo curing cancer and that's not always the case."

    even the preceding sentence was off..."Well done sir, with only one little slip that I can see." just one?

    No logical argument, some disagreement, no manipulation nor admittance to validity to his moot argument, not mad, he challenged, challenge was met and conquered. We have the right to not have the government interfere in our day to day lives. That’s not their job...

    If your statement was just sarcasm, then ignore mine. "

    Bayou Prophet wrote on May 26, 2009 12:15 PM:

    " Non-prophet, D-Berry

    We all agree that the life of a child trumps the wishes of the parents. When a parent harms their child, whether through malicious, carelessness or ignorance we all agree that the government should intervene.

    This is simply a case of harm through ignorance. The experts agree that Daniel has a 90% chance of survival with chemo and very little chance of survival without it. You may disagree with the experts based on personal experience or religious beliefs. The courts cannot. "

    Bayou Prophet wrote on May 26, 2009 12:01 PM:

    " Phyllis

    You mentioned the story about God sending the boat 3 times. That was pretty much the point I was trying to make.

    Some people believe some crazy things. In this case, the experts believe that Daniel had a 90% chance of life with chemo. In the past, experts used to be honored. Today, they are more and more reviled partly due to some churches believing science and religion are incompatible. When it comes to life or death, I believe the courts should side with the experts. "

    Go Prophet wrote on May 26, 2009 10:50 AM:

    " That was awesome. You won the thread. Let me recap what just happened.

    1. You presented a logical argument.

    2. The bandwagon disagreed with mostly emotional responses.

    3. You manipulated those disagreeing with you to offer your argument in another context thereby admitting that your argument was valid.

    4. They got mad, plugged their ears and started LALALALALALALA

    Well done sir, with only one little slip that I can see. Your argument is based on chemo curing cancer and that's not always the case. "

    To D. Hertz wrote on May 26, 2009 8:42 AM:

    " Bull crackers dude. You're so full of it.

    This 'kid' didn't decide. He may have requested but his parents decided and supported his request. That's their choice not yours or anybody else’s, not the doc's or the law's. His parents ARE looking out for him. At no time was he in any danger except from the doc and judge. His parents could have sought treatment for their son much easier had this doc not wanted to be in the lime light. That's all the doc wanted, his 15 min. of fame. "

    D. Hertz wrote on May 25, 2009 9:56 PM:

    " This kid has absolutely no right to make a choice such as this anyway. So why entrust that decision to a parent who has weird beliefs? At some point, someone, other than the parent, has to look out for the child.

    Also, all chemo is not created equal. Some of it will kill quickly, some will save your life. Unless you are a oncologist, then you have to rely on doctor's advise. "

    To non-prophet wrote on May 25, 2009 2:03 PM:

    " I noticed you like to twist the meanings here. You went past everything that was said and saw a statement that when used in a different setting would make your point. But it wasn't said in a different setting and didn't even come close to your point yet you pursued it anyway to make your point. You should do well to work in "The Spin Zone" because that's what they do. Take a partial truth and twist it till it's unrecognizable and run with that as the whole truth. Grrr "

    Da Berry wrote on May 25, 2009 1:52 PM:

    " Your argument is moot. These people chose life. They are seeking out a different possibility to preserve it against this radical disease. They're not killing their son, they're seeking a better way to save him. You have no point here if that's the case. They chose life at conception, at birth, and now that this vile affliction seeks to take him out they're seeking life again in an alternative way that will also give him quality of life as well. There's more than one way to come against cancer. "

    Phyllis Romero wrote on May 25, 2009 10:39 AM:

    " Bayou Prophet,
    I think we agree on one thing - life is precious. For the record, I am adamantly pro-life and against abortion.
    The argument here is there may be more than one way for a person to live(may not be conventional medicine) - or sometimes God just wants to call a person home and that is natural and part of life. Death is a part of life. It's not pleasant, it makes us sad when we lose someone, but that's the course. For those of us who believe, there is a life after, with our Heavenly Father. God bless. "

    Bayou Prophet wrote on May 24, 2009 11:40 PM:

    " " life should be the ultimate choice. When it's not, it's simply murder."

    This, my friend, is the whole of my argument. Thank you kindly. "

    Da Berry wrote on May 24, 2009 1:38 PM:

    " We have the right to choose the method of cure, and to not be dictated by the government which is best for us. In that case, yes, we have the right to choose. In the issue of abortion? The choice was already made when the child was conceived in most cases, when it wasn't by 'her' choice (rape), life should be the ultimate choice. When it's not, it's simply murder. Whether abortion is legal or not there are eternal consequences, and it's the individuals choice as to what their willing to face when they meet their eternity. PRO-LIFE "

    Bayou Prophet wrote on May 24, 2009 3:08 AM:

    " "AS AMERICAN CITIZENS WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE."

    "That's the awesome thing about being an American, THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE."

    "We have FREEDOM of choice here."

    So you're pro-choice is what you're trying to say? "

    Bayou Prophet wrote on May 24, 2009 3:05 AM:

    " Phyllis:

    I'm sorry but one or two personal stories about how bad chemo is on people does not invalidate the entire field of medicine.

    I completely understand the point you're trying to make. I get it. I disagree with it. This is child abuse. "

    Bayou Prophet wrote on May 23, 2009 8:33 PM:

    " " Many have died on chemo..."

    Red herring. Read the article. This child has a 90% chance of survival with chemo.

    "IT'S NOT our governments NOR the doctors decision to make...[rant snip]. "

    What if the mother were starving him to death? Would you support the rights of the mother in that instance? "

    Phyllis Romero cont. wrote on May 23, 2009 6:01 PM:

    " Bayou Prophet, have you not heard the similar story of the boy who was in the same situation a few years ago and fought the court and won and did not have chemotheraphy? He is living and cancer-free. "

    Phyllis Romero wrote on May 23, 2009 5:52 PM:

    " To Bayou Prophet,
    My opinion is not only based on religious beliefs, but on life experience. I have seen people dwindle down to nothing on chemotheraphy and die anyway, and I have seen people survive. Many other people on this post have this same experience as you can see from the majority. My other posts explain my views, if you don't get it, you don't get it. Perhaps you haven't seen both sides in your own life experiences. "

    To non-prophet the ludicrous wrote on May 23, 2009 3:41 PM:

    " They are getting treatment for their son. Just not chemo. There are many alternative treatments. That's the awesome thing about being an American, THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE. Just because this doc believes that this is the ONLY way, doesn't make that a fact. Just because he said their refusing to get their child medical treatment, doesn't make that a fact either. Not only is this doc not the only one that specializes in cancer but he's also NOT GOD. For the law to step in like this is unconstitutional. They made their own CHOICE. "

    Bbean wrote on May 23, 2009 11:17 AM:

    " These people are trying an alternative treatment . They are not sitting back and doing nothing.
    Will the Dr. and be charged with neglence if the child dies after chemo? "

    chemo is 1 Killer for cancer patients wrote on May 23, 2009 3:59 AM:

    " My mother was diagnosed with stabe 4 cancer in May 2008, never smoked a day in her life. The doctors gave her 2 options, with no chemo she would die in 3 months, with chemo she would live at least 9 months. Well she took chemo and died in 3 months, and I have to say this was the worst 3 months I had to share with my mother and my best friend. Within the 3 months of chemo it traveled from her lungs to her entire body. I would advise everyone not to have chemo. "

    Bayou Prophet wrote on May 22, 2009 11:24 PM:

    " Amazed:

    Your children do NOT belong to you. They are in your custody, but are not your property. They have rights that the state is mandated to protect.

    That fact that we're having this conversation is appalling. "

    Bayou Prophet wrote on May 22, 2009 11:19 PM:

    " Phyllis:

    You never answered my question. Here it is again:

    If you don't believe it's ok to starve a child to death because of religious conviction, can you please explain how you can reconcile that belief with your other belief that it's ok to refuse a child medical treatment because of religious conviction? "

    To non-prophet wrote on May 22, 2009 7:55 PM:

    " Many have died on chemo that would have survived longer with better quality of life without. IT'S NOT our governments NOR the doctors decision to make here in AMERICA !!!! We have FREEDOM of choice here. Who the heck do you think you are that you think you can decide for someone else what course of action they should take to solve their own problems. THEY DON'T WANT THE CHEMO and I'm with them. It's their choice to make. Go twist your own arm. The kid could die or live either way. "

    To WOW wrote on May 22, 2009 1:44 PM:

    " You talk about yourself a lot don't you. The stupidity is yours.

    What if you 'wanted' to do chemo but the doc & law were saying that you "have" to do this other option and they would take you by force to do this against your will. That in essence is what's happening here. Yes chemo works for some, but not all and that's beside the point. These people have the 'RIGHT' to choose a different treatment. AS AMERICAN CITIZENS WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE. Case & Point. "

    Amazed wrote on May 22, 2009 11:51 AM:

    " I watched 3 of my family members die from cancer. All 3 were brought down to less than 100lbs from the chemo. The chemo did not prolong their life instead it ruined the quality of the life they had left.
    But what this comes down to is freedom, the belief that your children belongs to you and not the government. Dr's can kill a baby about to be born and can watch an aborted child die that was born alive. But a parent can not choose a course of treatment for their child. "

    Phyllis Romero cont. wrote on May 22, 2009 11:50 AM:

    " As a sidenote and in defense of a couple of my doctors, there are doctors who genuinely want to help. They are far and few between. My point is that medicine and doctors are not God, and God ultimately is in control. From what I have seen with the people I've known to have cancer, chemo in its first round can be effective, but if the cancer returns very soon as is in the case with this boy, the chemo kills before the cancer. Everyone has a right to their decision based on what they have been through. "

    Phyllis Romero wrote on May 22, 2009 11:45 AM:

    " To: To Phyllis - A couple of the doctors I have are compassionate, it's just that with doctors I find they feel that what they learned in med school is it, it has to work the way they are taught, and it doesn't always happen the way they are taught and they look at it as the only answer. God bless you in return.
    To Wow and Bayou Prophet, in some cultures a 13 year old male is considered of age. "

    Bayou Prophet wrote on May 22, 2009 11:37 AM:

    " To DI Reader:

    "I think the parents should be the ones to make the ultimate decision..."

    Read that very carefully and slowly and let the implications of your statement sink in. Are you sure that you really believe that it's the right of the parents to determine the fate of their children, even when they determine that the child should die? "

    Bayou Prophet wrote on May 22, 2009 11:33 AM:

    " To Phyllis:

    If you don't believe it's ok to starve a child to death because of religious conviction, can you please explain how you can reconcile that belief with your other belief that it's ok to refuse a child medical treatment because of religious conviction? "

    Bayou Prophet wrote on May 22, 2009 11:30 AM:

    " "The point HERE is that our government now has double standards."

    I don't believe it's ok to kill a child in the womb in the same way I don't believe it's ok to allow snake oil to cause the death of a child outside. As far as double standards go, I'm surprised you can't see the hypocrisy of disregarding the mother's beliefs about murder while the child is in the womb, but supporting them as long as the child is born.

    You're basically saying that unborn children are worth more than born children. "

    Wow wrote on May 22, 2009 11:01 AM:

    " My god, the stupidity is rampant in this forum.

    Yes, chemo will hurt the kid's body while it's killing the cancer. But the thing is, after the chemo is over, he gets to live for the rest of his life.

    I'm sure that when he's in his 30s and has a wife and kids he'll be glad he didn't just let himself die.

    As a side note, does anyone really think it's intelligent for a 13 year old who can't even read to make this kind of a decision? "

    To Phyllis wrote on May 22, 2009 8:25 AM:

    " I would hope that you would be able to find a physician that would be more compassionate with your situation rather than one that cops an attitude. That's ridiculous. For years I refused to go to doctors for just that reason and was accused of being stubborn. I did herbal products, learned my body, then tried again till I found one that listens to me. I still use some herbal things but it’s nice to have a doc that is in tune with his patients feelings as well as the rest. Be Blessed... "

    DI Reader wrote on May 22, 2009 7:14 AM:

    " I think the parents should be the ones to make the ultimate decision whether or not to give the child treatment. My mother fought cancer for 5 years. It wasn't the cancer that killed her, it was the chemo!!! "

    Phyllis Romero wrote on May 22, 2009 6:50 AM:

    " To Bayou Prophet,
    That is ludicrous and no I don't think she was right. "

    Phyllis Romero wrote on May 21, 2009 6:53 PM:

    " Too many people look to medicine and doctors as God and they don't always help. I have chronic illnesses and have not been helped by medicine yet. I have gone to doctors(i.e. asked the first, second and third boat for help) and am on medicine and my condition has worsened.The medicines prescribed for these conditions can be just as dangerous as the conditions. If you go back to doctors and say "This isn't helping," they're defensive. I have to make the choice everyday to give up or have faith that God has a purpose in this. "

    To Non-Prophet wrote on May 21, 2009 6:45 PM:

    " The point HERE is that our government now has double standards. It's ok to KILL a baby, but we're not supposed to have the right to choose our own treatment plan for cancer for our child? I've seen cancer patients die, not because of the cancer but because of the chemo treatment, which happened to someone close to me recently…All that doctor has is an educated( 'guess' lets-see-if-this-works)but it's not DOC’s/law's right/place to make our choices for us…If the alternative doesn't work, at least he may have better quality of life in the mean while…Chemo-makes-you-deadly-sick-with-no-quality-of-life…who-wants-to-live-like-that???Not me!!! "

    Bayou Prophet wrote on May 21, 2009 5:41 PM:

    " To Phyllis:

    Recently, a woman starved her son to death because he was demon possessed so that God could raise him from the dead.

    Do you think she was in the right? "

    To Phyllis Romero--Cont. wrote on May 21, 2009 2:55 PM:

    " God why have you forsaken me. I asked for help and you sent me none..... God said, my son I sent 3 boats.... you refused their help.......... Now... God gave people the knowledge to create treatments for cancer... If we refuse to accept this help from God, what else do you expect from God? Faith is a powerful thing but using it wrong can be a stupid thing. I do hope what I said made sense "

    To Phyllis Romero wrote on May 21, 2009 2:50 PM:

    " I am reminded of the story of a man who fell out his boat and ask God to save him. A ocean liner pass by and asked if he needed help. The man said no thanks God will save me, than a motor boat pass by and asked if he needed help. The man said no God will save me. Than a 3rd boat came along and ask the man if he needed help. Again the man said no thank God will save me. The the man drowned. When the man met God in heaven, he asked God.............. "

    Phyllis Romero wrote on May 21, 2009 2:43 PM:

    " I believe in the sanctity of human life and that God gave us life. I believe in trying medicine, but if it fails or suffering is prolonged, I can't judge a person for not wanting it anymore. This child had initial response with chemo the first time, but just a couple of months later, it was much worse. Can you really just judge a parent for not wanting to see their child suffer anymore? Have you ever seen a loved one really suffer? I have and it's terrible. "

    Phyllis Romero wrote on May 21, 2009 2:39 PM:

    " To: To Phyllis Romero
    Dying in this life is not the end. There is a life beyond this one with our Heavenly Father. A life free of illness, violence, corruption, pain, etc. God sees the end from the beginning, He sees it all together.
    I can't judge that child's parents. My son had chronic asthma when he was younger and the more we went to doctors, the sicker he got. I finally just decided to pray and put him on supplements, improved his diet and he got better. "

    Bayou Prophet wrote on May 21, 2009 11:18 AM:

    " Missing Point:

    The article says there is a high probability of recovery with chemo and a high probably of death without it.

    Any parent who is willing to take 20 to 1 odds over 2 to 1 odds where their child is at stake is not capable of parenting. I know it's not cool in New Iberia to trust science over religion but in this case where the life of a child is at stake, you need to take the better bet. If the parent disagrees, the courts have a duty to step in. "

    To Phyllis Romero wrote on May 21, 2009 10:27 AM:

    " You say we will live if God wants us to live. That means when people do die, it's because God wants them dead.

    That makes God a real jerk, if not outright evil. "

    Tod wrote on May 21, 2009 8:58 AM:

    " Please do your research there is over a 90% chance of survival with chemo and there is almost certain chance of death without it for this particular type of cancer. All the Doctor is trying to do is what is best for his patient. Let's face it people....not everyone is qualified to be a parent. Hoping and wishing cancer will not kill your child is not something I would EVER do. "

    MIssing Point wrote on May 20, 2009 6:23 PM:

    " What most people are missing is the point that it is only a PROBABILITY that the chemo will work to pause the cancer.
    Chemo as we all know is extremely dangerous to the body especially in developing children. I"ve known people with alt. med that lived months longer than projected and I've known people who have taken chemo and lived less. Nothing with cancer is an exact science. It's all theories and hope - So why not alt. medicne and hope?? When you take chemo you take a chance too!! cont.. "

    Kim B wrote on May 20, 2009 4:21 PM:

    " This is a tricky one. I dont think that the gov't should be able to "make" a person get treatment but in this case he is just a child. I would not think a child would be able outweigh the pro’s and con’s of this situation.
    What about the people that refuses blood transfusions and resuscitations b/c of religion. If a child would die because of that is it okay? Tricky, tricky. "

    Phyllis Romero wrote on May 20, 2009 3:52 PM:

    " Actually I agree with Wendy. The government says it's ok to abort a baby, but they want to step in on this. Last I heard it was not magic the parents believe in but God. Chemotheraphy has been used in many people I love for their cancer but I credit God with saving those who have lived, not the chemotheraphy. He is in control and we will live if He wants us to. My mother had a 15% chance to live 6 months for her cancer and nearly 0 chance for a year. That was five years ago. "

    Tony wrote on May 20, 2009 12:56 PM:

    " Well stated Tom! "

    Outraged wrote on May 20, 2009 12:09 PM:

    " This judge is totally wrong. You should not try to save stupid people from themselves. It just wastes everyone else's time and money. "

    Bayou Prophet wrote on May 20, 2009 11:42 AM:

    " To Wendy:

    This is one of those scenarios that can throw our cherished beliefs into stark relief against reality.

    Encouraging Daniel to reject treatment is an extremely late term abortion. You can't be pro-life and condone the actions of the parents. "

    Bayou Prophet wrote on May 20, 2009 11:30 AM:

    " The parents believe magic will cure their child and have passed on that belief to him. If he chooses to not accept treatment, he is killing himself at the encouragement of his parents albeit through their ignorance rather than their intentions.

    Is it a violation of rights to stop a 13 year old boy from jumping off a building because he and his family believes he can fly? "

    Wendy wrote on May 20, 2009 10:16 AM:

    " But it is ok to abort your child when you are about to go into labor. Seriously, this is so backwards. "

    Tom wrote on May 20, 2009 9:45 AM:

    " If there are other effective options available perhaps you should tell the AMA. I don’t think they are aware of them.

    The child is not the property of his parents. He is only their responsibility.

    The article I read stated there is a high probability of recovery with chemo and a high probability of death if chemo is refused.

    When parents fail to protect their children it is proper for a judge to step in and require it. "

    Fed Up Iberian wrote on May 20, 2009 9:40 AM:

    " I agree.Our government has decided that they have the right to raise children. I know they think that they are dong the child justice but not in my book. Now, if the alternative medicine does not work and he would need to be treated and did not get the treatment. Then the parents could be charged with neglect but not until all options are explored! "

WRITE A COMMENT

Use the form below to post a brief comment related to this story. Use the word count tool to assist you in keeping your remarks to 100 words or fewer.

•Comments must be approved by an editor or the publisher before appearing on the Web site but are not verified for accuracy nor have we verified the identity of any person supposedly posting an comment. Please consider this as you consider any statement made. A thoughtful contribution to the online discussion is appreciated.

• Please note your comments must attempt to follow basic rules of grammar and punctuation or they will not be posted. Do not use unfamiliar abbreviations or text-like short cuts, like ur for your. Please keep your tone civil. You can say someone's idea is stupid but you cannot say someone is stupid.

• Comments should deal with matters of public concern. Problems with private individuals or private companies are not likely to get posted.

• Questions or comments about items posted should be e-mailed to dailyiberian@bellsouth.net.

(optional)
Current Word Count:
   

Classifieds

Jobs

Jobs

View All Jobs

Homes

Homes

View All Homes

Autos

Autos

View All Autos


Contact Us

Subscribe
Vacation Hold
General Email

Mailing Address:
The Daily Iberian
P.O. Box 9290
New Iberia, LA
70562-9290

Street Address:
926 East Main St.
New Iberia, LA 70560

Phone:
(337) 365-6773

Fax:
(337)-367-9640

Inside Louisiana:
800-365-6773

Local Weather