Judge Rules Family Can't Refuse Chemo for Child With Cancer

[southcitymom]

Traditional cancer treatments are just that, treatments. They might not be a cure, but that are the best that we have. Natural remedies, voodoo, shamanism, etc. have never even been proven to be effective treatments for cancer. The only time I think those should even be *thought* about is when you've been to several doctors and they've all said that there is nothing else they can do. Then you have nothing to lose.

I don't understand why some people have this idea that it's okay to not get treatment for your child. What if it was a broken leg? Should a parent be able to allow their child to be disabled for life or die from an infection because they don't believe in medical treatment? When does it become abuse? If you believe this, shouldn't it be up to the family if the child goes to school or gets married at 13? This might sound nuts, but I am serious. If parents can make this life or death decision with the child, why not the ones I mentioned above?

The parents have the responsibility for the well-being of this child. They are in neglect of this duty. They should be charged with attempted murder.

You raise some great points and the Courts often find themselves in the tough position of sorting it all out - what's abuse and what's clearly within the rights of the family? The line is NOT always easy to find - I'm not suggesting it's always easy to find. In the case we're discussing right now - based on what I know - the Court has made a terrible decision. MOO.

The Law is clear (ie - an actual age is stated) about when marriage can be entered into. The Law is NOT clear about what a parent can or can't decide regarding a child's medical condition.

As far as a child with a broken leg and not seeking conventional medical treatment.....I fully support an individual family's rights to believe that with enough prayer, a person can be healed from any condition, and to practice spiritual healing, but I also agree that the circumstances need to be considered. Without more information about any specific case, I can't really form an opinion.

I will say that I have read of cases where I felt like the family's decision to not seek traditional Western medical solutions were negligent - alot of it depends on context.

If you are a sadist and you are not seeking healthcare for your child's broken leg because you enjoy seeing the child in pain and your child is begging you to take him to the doctor, that's negligent - your child should be protected from you. If you believe with all your heart that prayer to God is the only source of healing and that Western medical solutions are a forbidden religious option and you have practiced this way of handling health issues on yourself and your family for years, I'm going to consider the sincerity of your position and not assume that your choices are wrong or poorly contemplated even if I don't agree with those choices.

I understand that others may not see distinction between the two situations, but I see a big one.

 

[southcitymom]

I waited until I had read the article to comment.

After reading the article, I realized that this is a religious choice. This family is Catholic but they adhere to the teachings of the Nemenhah Band.

I went that the website for them and I couldn't interpret what they were saying exactly about whether or not they were recognized by the Federal Gov. as a religion.

Someone else might be able to make heads or tails out of it:

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

This is a very complex case. I haven't formed an opinion one way or another yet. On one hand, I see the need to respect the dogma of religious beliefs.

On the other hand, I see the need for medical care that is deemed appropriate if it will potentially save a life of a child.

Then on the third hand )) I don't like to see government get involved in the parenting of children if there isn't documented abuse in any form.

This is a situation I will have to mull over in my mind for a while. Interesting and complex, thanks SCM for posting.

It is very complex, Kat - I agree. I have never seen a case like this where religious/spiritual beliefs did not come into play. I appreciate the Court's delicate position. As I said in my previous post, in cases like this, I usually believe the family's spiritual beliefs and practices TRUMP the belief that everyone who doesn't go with what Western medicine tells us is the best treatment option for any given health issue is negligent.

If this case involved an adult, we probably wouldn't give it much of a thought and I'm sure that the Court would let an adult follow their own choices. But perhaps not - I do recall a case we discussed here several years ago where a woman gave birth at home and had a bad time and she died of a terrible painful infection. She and her husband were IIRC Scientologists. She didn't want outside treatment and her husband didn't force her to seek it. I believe her family tried to sue him or get criminal changes brought against him. I thought that was wrong as all evidence I saw made it clear that this woman did not want help. I am unsure what eventually happened in that case and people got extra worked up about it due to the Scientology connection and people's impressions of Scientology.

 

[GreenEyedGirl]

The mother of the little boy I told the short about was diagnosed about 6 months later with breast cancer. After watching both of her sons-yes, both-succumb to Leukemia after traditional treatment (chemo, rad) she decided she would not go that route. She chose all natural-herbals, blue-green algae, etc. She did very well-in no pain or very minimal for about 4 years. When it finally metastasized, it was very quick and I must say her quality of life was so, so much better than her two boys she watched die. I guess what I'm saying is that the choice of chemo/rad should be one's own. Chemo is basically rat poison-it kills the good cells and the bad cells-there is no distinguishing between the two. I don't believe anyone should be made to have to take treatment. This is just my opinion.

 

[Kat]

SCM, I would really like to see the court docs, especially the Judge's ruling. I would like to know how the Judge came to this conclusion. It would help if we knew all the extenuating circumstances, mitigating and aggravating.

I just can't make my own judgement quickly.

 

[southcitymom]

SCM, I would really like to see the court docs, especially the Judge's ruling. I would like to know how the Judge came to this conclusion. It would help if we knew all the extenuating circumstances, mitigating and aggravating.

I just can't make my own judgement quickly.

I hear you, Kat - I'd like to read the whole thing too. If I can work it in between today's heavy schedule of Tae Kwon Do, Flag Football, birthday parties and date night, I will try to search for it!

 

[LLC]

Maybe he won't die. Maybe their way will work. We don't know what might happen. They have a right to choose or not choose treatment for this child.

Yes, they do have the right to choose . I just cannot fathom NOT treating my child . Stand by and watch my 13 year old die. Seriously? Not only would I find ANY treatment available , I would sell my soul to the devil. How can this even be an issue?

 

[southcitymom]

Yes, they do have the right to choose . I just cannot fathom NOT treating my child . Stand by and watch my 13 year old die. Seriously? Not only would I find ANY treatment available , I would sell my soul to the devil. How can this even be an issue?

It's an issue because some people have faith in other types of treatment and this is their right.

It's always interesting to me. Many Christians say they believe in the power of prayer and the Bible says repeatedly that prayer and prayer alone can and will heal. But let someone honestly give that a go and people get nuts and all of the sudden you're branded a whack job who doesn't care about your child. Fascinating....

I guess some of us kind of believe that prayer might help if you also do everything Western medicine tells you to do. That's their choice, of course, but it's not mine.

 

[Trino]

SCM, I would really like to see the court docs, especially the Judge's ruling. I would like to know how the Judge came to this conclusion. It would help if we knew all the extenuating circumstances, mitigating and aggravating.

I just can't make my own judgement quickly.

Here are the records:
http://mncourts.gov/?page=NewsItemDisplay&item=45848


Maybe this has already been posted on WS, but this is the local story.
http://www.twincities.com/ci_12382632

This is the 9 May story before the judge's decision. It's got more info.
http://www.nujournal.com/page/content.detail/id/506825.html?nav=5009

 

[Trino]

Daniel has an IEP, meaning he is a special education student. He believes he will die if he takes chemo. ALSO, he believes in his religion that he is a medicine man.

Read Daniel's testimony.

http://mncourts.gov/Documents/0/Public/Other/Hauser/Hauser_Transcript.pdf

 

[angelmom]

Daniel and his mother both believe (or claim to believe) that he is not sick, despite evidence to the contrary.

Daniel is 13 and cannot read. Not that he reads below grade level, but he cannot read.

How has he come to this conclusion that he is not sick and can be treated with other therapy? Who has filled this child's head with these ideas? Because, clearly, he has not been reading up on his options.

 

[ziggy]

Everyone has expressed very good points on both sides.

I find myself sometimes thinking...what is wrong with dying? That sounds really terrible, but it IS a part of life. None of us are getting out of here alive.

Some may believe that this is God's will and that either reincarnation or a better existence is waiting for them. Who are we to force them to keep living when sparing that life forcefully may cause the person short term suffering, or a lifetime of constant medical treatment to address issues created by the original treatment?

Maybe we should honor the right for people to decide that if they have a terminal illness, they should be allowed to die from it if they want to. Because he is only 13 and can't educate himself is indeed a quandry.

Regardless what our heart tells us about "his" rights, his parents believe and more importantly he believes this treatment will kill him. It matters not that his parents may have influenced this belief. The bigger issue is that if he believes this, chances are he will be right. The power of belief is a major factor here.

I just can't see what good it would do to force this.

If he dies, then their beliefs will also sustain them. I think it's OK sometimes to admit that there is nothing that can be done to change a belief system.

What is wrong with dying really?

 

[southcitymom]

Trino - thanks for all these links - they really flesh out the story. I have only read about half the Court documents. I do like the Judge and can really feel what a tightrope was being walked here for the Court. I will read more when I have time.

 

[southcitymom]

Daniel and his mother both believe (or claim to believe) that he is not sick, despite evidence to the contrary.

Daniel is 13 and cannot read. Not that he reads below grade level, but he cannot read.

How has he come to this conclusion that he is not sick and can be treated with other therapy? Who has filled this child's head with these ideas? Because, clearly, he has not been reading up on his options.

I just finished reading the Court's interview with Daniel. The Judge did not ask a lot of questions I would have asked, but maybe some of those answers are in the docs I haven't gotten to yet.

 

[southcitymom]

Everyone has expressed very good points on both sides.

I find myself sometimes thinking...what is wrong with dying? That sounds really terrible, but it IS a part of life. None of us are getting out of here alive.

Some may believe that this is God's will and that either reincarnation or a better existence is waiting for them. Who are we to force them to keep living when sparing that life forcefully may cause the person short term suffering, or a lifetime of constant medical treatment to address issues created by the original treatment?

Maybe we should honor the right for people to decide that if they have a terminal illness, they should be allowed to die from it if they want to. Because he is only 13 and can't educate himself is indeed a quandry.

Regardless what our heart tells us about "his" rights, his parents believe and more importantly he believes this treatment will kill him. It matters not that his parents may have influenced this belief. The bigger issue is that if he believes this, chances are he will be right. The power of belief is a major factor here.

I just can't see what good it would do to force this.

If he dies, then their beliefs will also sustain them. I think it's OK sometimes to admit that there is nothing that can be done to change a belief system.

What is wrong with dying really?

Nothing at all and this always figures into my contemplation of these cases.

 

[elle1919]

Everyone has expressed very good points on both sides.

I find myself sometimes thinking...what is wrong with dying? That sounds really terrible, but it IS a part of life. None of us are getting out of here alive.

Some may believe that this is God's will and that either reincarnation or a better existence is waiting for them. Who are we to force them to keep living when sparing that life forcefully may cause the person short term suffering, or a lifetime of constant medical treatment to address issues created by the original treatment?

Maybe we should honor the right for people to decide that if they have a terminal illness, they should be allowed to die from it if they want to. Because he is only 13 and can't educate himself is indeed a quandry.

Regardless what our heart tells us about "his" rights, his parents believe and more importantly he believes this treatment will kill him. It matters not that his parents may have influenced this belief. The bigger issue is that if he believes this, chances are he will be right. The power of belief is a major factor here.

I just can't see what good it would do to force this.

If he dies, then their beliefs will also sustain them. I think it's OK sometimes to admit that there is nothing that can be done to change a belief system.

What is wrong with dying really?

Wonderful post. I don't feel that there is anything wrong with dying. I know where I will go when I die, maybe this 13 year old child does as well. I feel that it is completely up to the parents of this child to decide what treatments if any he should receive.

Just because the boy has an IEP DOES NOT mean a thing! My 11 year old daughter has an IEP as well and also receives special education services for ADHD and other mixed disabilities. An IEP plan is an independent education plan that a RESPONSIBLE parent seeks to protect the rights of the child with the disability. A parent that cares enough to fight with the system to get an IEP plan(sometimes this can take years to accomplish) must love their child very very much. to me this is a mom that loves her son and loves him enough to go to bat for him in the court system. Shame on the government if they step in and take her rights as a parent away.

All my opinion of course

 

[Trino]

http://www.twincities.com/allheadlines/ci_12385835

What's wrong with a parent not allowing a child medical attention? This case is now in neighboring Wisconsin. The mother is being prosecuted because she prayed instead of seeing help for her 11 yr old diabetic daughter. I can see the same thing happening in this case.

 

[ziggy]

I think reckless homicide is a bit harsh.

The disease was undiagnosed - I don't think they intended to kill her and think they honestly believed she might die, but also that she might be healed. Their mindset, although foreign to me, doesn't seem like intentional death.

I live with a diabetic 16 year old, diagnosed with juvenille diabetes since age 7.

I can only say that it is a very difficult life for some kids. As a teen some seem to want to die rather than living the way they have to. Completely unable to grasp the monumental consequences their lack of care for themselves will have, they frustrate parents and counselors because they can't be controlled at a certain age.

I know our heart strings are all pulled apart.

An insulin injection is far less horrific than chemo, but the differentiation in this case is the fact that they did not know their options and refuse.

Perhaps if friends and family had done something sooner, they may have understood and agreed to medical care. We will never know.

How do I feel about the government requiring that you take your children to the doctor? I don't honestly know but there is something about that mandate that bothers me in the same vein as requiring vaccinations. I don't like it.

Do I like that a child died? Certainly not.

There is no good solution because either way there are harmful consequences. On one hand, we lose a child and on the other we lose liberty.

Since the child's condition was not caused by the hands of the parents, I believe they deserve some lieniency. If you cause your children to be hurt or ill, then by all means, denying them medical attention is intentional.

The way they are handling this case is consistent with that of people who batter and physically abuse their children.

I disagree with the prosecution - which is rare for me!

 

[PeteyGirl]

I'm an oncology nurse and don't know what to think about this!!

If he had a kind of cancer with a much graver prognosis than Hodgkin's, I wonder if the courts would have gotten involved at all?

Hodgkin's is one of those cancers that is QUITE curable WITH chemo. I'll bet this weighs heavily in why this case is happening at all.

 

[HesterMofet]

You raise some great points and the Courts often find themselves in the tough position of sorting it all out - what's abuse and what's clearly within the rights of the family? The line is NOT always easy to find - I'm not suggesting it's always easy to find. In the case we're discussing right now - based on what I know - the Court has made a terrible decision. MOO.

The Law is clear (ie - an actual age is stated) about when marriage can be entered into. The Law is NOT clear about what a parent can or can't decide regarding a child's medical condition.

As far as a child with a broken leg and not seeking conventional medical treatment.....I fully support an individual family's rights to believe that with enough prayer, a person can be healed from any condition, and to practice spiritual healing, but I also agree that the circumstances need to be considered. Without more information about any specific case, I can't really form an opinion.

I will say that I have read of cases where I felt like the family's decision to not seek traditional Western medical solutions were negligent - alot of it depends on context.

If you are a sadist and you are not seeking healthcare for your child's broken leg because you enjoy seeing the child in pain and your child is begging you to take him to the doctor, that's negligent - your child should be protected from you. If you believe with all your heart that prayer to God is the only source of healing and that Western medical solutions are a forbidden religious option and you have practiced this way of handling health issues on yourself and your family for years, I'm going to consider the sincerity of your position and not assume that your choices are wrong or poorly contemplated even if I don't agree with those choices.

I understand that others may not see distinction between the two situations, but I see a big one.

There is an old joke that this reminds me of. It's about a man who is trapped in his house during a flood. He crawls up on the roof and prays to God to save him. A boat comes by and the people say, "Come on in, we'll rescue you!" He says, "No, God will save me!" The water continues to rise Another boat comes by and he shoos them off the same way. The water is now up to his neck. A helicopter hovers overhead and the pilot shouts down, "Grab the rope and we'll get you out of there." He says, "No, God will save me!" The helicopter flies away. The man drowns and gets to the Pearly Gates. Upon meeting God, he says, "I prayed, God. Why didn't you save me?" And God replies, "I sent you two boats and a helicopter, what more could I do?"

Modern medicine is the equivalent of the boats and the helicopter. If you believe in God, why not believe that he gave us the abilities to find this medicine?

 

[lizzybeth]

I had ALL at eleven and I didn't want to take chemo either. I wanted to go home and pretend there was nothing wrong with me. My parents didn't listen and I went through five years of chemo. Thinking back, I'm so glad I did. It was hell, but I'm relatively healthy now and I have two beautiful children.

I can understand if there were no hope of a cure or remission for this young man. Then I would say why make him go through with it? Let him enjoy what time he has left, but he has a 95% chance of being cured.

When he's thirty I can't see him asking his parents "why did you make me go through with it?" I see him saying "thank you for getting me the treatment that I needed."

JMO