Judge rules family can't refuse chemo for boy

[The Battousai]

I love George Carlin.

http://www.nemenhah.org/internal/about_us.html

I've never seen so many capitalized words

 

[The Battousai]

James Randi should have a talk with these people

[YT]dxPQ1-KsBG0&feature=channel_page[/YT]

 

[Majic Walrus]

Update:

I think that in many cases, the responsibility of the state to protect it's citizen's life can outweigh it's responsibility to protect their religious freedoms. I am still fearful of what may happen if this becomes a common practice though.

 

[amazingfantasy15]

Apparently the mother and son are on the run now. The court ordered X-Ray was done and the cancer has grown though, so I guess they're running so the kid can die for religious beliefs.

 

[StorminNorman]

The government is completely wrong here. This is a disgusting abuse of federal power.

 

[StorminNorman]

Apparently the mother and son are on the run now. The court ordered X-Ray was done and the cancer has grown though, so I guess they're running so the kid can die for religious beliefs.

They should have that right.

 

[BestGirl]

Apparently the mother and son are on the run now. The court ordered X-Ray was done and the cancer has grown though, so I guess they're running so the kid can die for religious beliefs.

The mom won't be happy until her son's dead.

ETA: Norman, did you see where the ComicChick said the boy has a learning disability and can't read? This is all the parents' decision.

 

[StorminNorman]

And I think a parent's authority should be greater than the government in terms of a child's life.

 

[amazingfantasy15]

And I think a parent's authority should be greater than the government in terms of a child's life.

So do you think a parent shouldn't be charged with murder if they kill their kids because that's essentially what's happening. The cancer is treatable, there were positive results from the first chemo session, since they started using the religious "treatment" the cancer has grown.

 

[StorminNorman]

So do you think a parent shouldn't be charged with murder if they kill their kids because that's essentially what's happening. The cancer is treatable, there were positive results from the first chemo session, since they started using the religious "treatment" the cancer has grown.

You can't compare this to murder. That's not what it is. Not wanting your child to go through chemo is not murder. If the kid is killed during chemo...should the doctor be charged with murder? If the kid doesn't get better thanks to the chemo...should the doctor be charged with murder? This isn't as black and white as you are making it out to be. Chemo Therapy isn't that simple.

Again, the family has rights here. They have personal rights. The government has no business stomping on religious beliefs, nor the parents authority over their child.

 

[Majic Walrus]

You can't compare this to murder. That's not what it is. Not wanting your child to go through chemo is not murder. If the kid is killed during chemo...should the doctor be charged with murder? If the kid doesn't get better thanks to the chemo...should the doctor be charged with murder? This isn't as black and white as you are making it out to be. Chemo Therapy isn't that simple.

Again, the family has rights here. They have personal rights. The government has no business stomping on religious beliefs, nor the parents authority over their child.

I appreciate your views on this.

 

[amazingfantasy15]

You can't compare this to murder. That's not what it is. Not wanting your child to go through chemo is not murder. If the kid is killed during chemo...should the doctor be charged with murder? If the kid doesn't get better thanks to the chemo...should the doctor be charged with murder? This isn't as black and white as you are making it out to be. Chemo Therapy isn't that simple.

Again, the family has rights here. They have personal rights. The government has no business stomping on religious beliefs, nor the parents authority over their child.

Yeah, chemo might not work, but the actions being taken by this family will definitely result in the kids death. They aren't even trying to work in the kid's best interest. Maybe it's just my feelings about religion, but I can't understand that excuse. Of course it's not in the religious texts to use these treatments because those texts were written thousands of years ago before these treatments were invented. However, don't you think whatever God you're worshipping put the inventor on this Earth for a reason, to create a treatment to help your condition? Maybe it's not black and white, but there actions right not a definitely black, the only result right now for this kid is death.

 

[Majic Walrus]

Yeah, chemo might not work, but the actions being taken by this family will definitely result in the kids death. They aren't even trying to work in the kid's best interest. Maybe it's just my feelings about religion, but I can't understand that excuse. Of course it's not in the religious texts to use these treatments because those texts were written thousands of years ago before these treatments were invented. However, don't you think whatever God you're worshipping put the inventor on this Earth for a reason, to create a treatment to help your condition? Maybe it's not black and white, but there actions right not a definitely black, the only result right now for this kid is death.

I certainly agree with your stance scientifically, but I think that this is up for debate.

 

[StorminNorman]

Yeah, chemo might not work, but the actions being taken by this family will definitely result in the kids death.

The action of birth will definitely result in death.

They aren't even trying to work in the kid's best interest.

How can you say that? You have no idea what is going on in the mind of his parents. If they belief that the child's spiritual health is more important than his physical that's a decision that they themselves should make.

Maybe it's just my feelings about religion, but I can't understand that excuse.

You don't have to understand. Right or wrong has nothing to do with what you personally can or cannot understand.

Of course it's not in the religious texts to use these treatments because those texts were written thousands of years ago before these treatments were invented. However, don't you think whatever God you're worshipping put the inventor on this Earth for a reason, to create a treatment to help your condition? Maybe it's not black and white, but there actions right not a definitely black, the only result right now for this kid is death.

This isn't a Christianity religion, this is a native American religion. Native Americans have alway seen nature as sacred, it makes sense that those of this belief system would push against a treatment that relies on using man made poisons hoping to cure a sickness.

People fear death. Those outraged are the ones that are so afraid of death they feel that there is nothing worse in this world. I don't believe that and there are many others that don't.

 

[Addendum]

I don't need to know what is going on in the mind of this child's parents. They initially agreed to a first round of chemo. It made the tumor shrink, so it was working. Whatever quack treatment the parents decided on wasn't working, since the tumor grew. The tumor can still be treated by chemo. Since it worked in the past, the evidence would suggest that it could still work.

I'll take the word of those who know what they're talking about, which in this case, would be those with medical degrees. Unless the parents have a medical degree, they don't know what they're talking about.

 

[StorminNorman]

I don't need to know what is going on in the mind of this child's parents. They initially agreed to a first round of chemo. It made the tumor shrink, so it was working. Whatever quack treatment the parents decided on wasn't working, since the tumor grew. The tumor can still be treated by chemo. Since it worked in the past, the evidence would suggest that it could still work.

I'll take the word of those who know what they're talking about, which in this case, would be those with medical degrees. Unless the parents have a medical degree, they don't know what they're talking about.

People have the right to make bad decisions with their health. Parents have the right to buy their kids Big Mac's, Fun Dip and Choco Tocos. Parents have the right to allow their kid to play physical games like Football...or to allow their kids to play Halo 20 hours a day. Parents have the right to take a kid to a doctor, or take their kid to a chiropractor or take their kid to the local religious leader.

People have the right to be wrong.

 

[Addendum]

So their right to be wrong overrules the child's right to live?

 

[StorminNorman]

In this case? Yes. In every case? No. Parents should get to decide their child's medical care - not the government.

 

[Majic Walrus]

I don't need to know what is going on in the mind of this child's parents. They initially agreed to a first round of chemo. It made the tumor shrink, so it was working. Whatever quack treatment the parents decided on wasn't working, since the tumor grew. The tumor can still be treated by chemo. Since it worked in the past, the evidence would suggest that it could still work.

I'll take the word of those who know what they're talking about, which in this case, would be those with medical degrees. Unless the parents have a medical degree, they don't know what they're talking about.

Exactly. You get to take the word of... they get to choose just like you did.

 

[Addendum]

Providing care for a kid tops the parent's supposed "right" to be wrong. Every parent I've talked to has said that providing for their kid, including making sure they're healthy, tops everything.

So as usual, we'll disagree on this subject.

 

[Addendum]

Exactly. You get to take the word of... they get to choose just like you did.

And I made my choice based on the evidence provided. The people with the medical degrees had more of it than this kid's parents or their religion.

 

[Majic Walrus]

Providing care for a kid tops the parent's supposed "right" to be wrong. Every parent I've talked to has said that providing for their kid, including making sure they're healthy, tops everything.

So as usual, we'll disagree on this subject.

And I made my choice based on the evidence provided. The people with the medical degrees had more of it than this kid's parents or their religion.

You're missing the point or ignoring it though. Assume for just a moment that these parents fully believe that what they are doing is right. Just assume that's how they feel.

Boom. They think they are doing what is best for the child then it's their choice. Medical science does not trump freedom of religion in this case.

 

[BestGirl]

If I have kids, I think I'll refuse to feed them anything but unleavened bread and wine on religious grounds. I wonder how long I'd be allowed to keep those kids.

 

[Addendum]

You're missing the point or ignoring it though. Assume for just a moment that these parents fully believe that what they are doing is right. Just assume that's how they feel.

Boom. They think they are doing what is best for the child then it's their choice. Medical science does not trump freedom of religion in this case.

They think they are doing best. The evidence says otherwise.

 

[ComicChick]

You can't compare this to murder. That's not what it is. Not wanting your child to go through chemo is not murder. If the kid is killed during chemo...should the doctor be charged with murder? If the kid doesn't get better thanks to the chemo...should the doctor be charged with murder? This isn't as black and white as you are making it out to be. Chemo Therapy isn't that simple.

Again, the family has rights here. They have personal rights. The government has no business stomping on religious beliefs, nor the parents authority over their child.

some would argue that it coud possibly be negligent homicide. i don't want to argue at all because there are many valid points for each side.

this topic was discussed recently on an episode of Law & Order. Granted a tv show is hardly the basis for a good argument, but the topic relates somewhat. A mother was charged with homicide because she had chosen not to have her child vaccinated for a disease. As a result, another child contracted this disease and died as a result.

Cancer is not a disease you can "catch" so it's not an exact comparison, but how would people think if the child had a communicabe disease and the parents were resisting treatment? In this case, it is only their child at risk, and with him being learning disabled, i really don't think he truly understands exactly.

whatever the outcome, this case will set precedence for many others in the future