This came up on my AOL and wondered what some of the mamas and papas here thought of the situation... http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/judge-orders-teen-to-have-cancer/20060721192209990010?ncid=NWS00010000000001
its a tough call. As a parent, I would want my child to have the chemo IF it would save him. If there really isn't a hope, then I would let him die in peace.
Why? Does he have a right to order a person chemo treatment, even if they don't want it? Does anyone really have that right other than the person getting the treatment?
This is difficult. The fact that this is his SECOND round of chemo makes sure that he already has been given a chance on chemo, it obviously didn't work, and he wants to refuse. The "natural diet" as a FIRST choice, for a child with cancer makes me VERY nervous. As an adult, you can make your own decisions, but, IMO, a boy this age, may be very influenced by things which are really beyond his understanding (say, for instance.....death is forever) BUT, that being said, he IS sixteen, not a baby, and has some say in his own treatment. I think maybe a course in proper treatments for cancer, the success rates, in real terms of "naturaopathic" treatments, opposed to proven medical treatment, and taking into account his stage of cancer (if the chemo has a VERY low chance of working, why, in God's name subject the child to it again?) the other options and whether his is one of the cancers that do respond with repeated courses of chemo, as awful as that may be, it beats ending your life at 16, and of course taking into account the success rate of the actual chemo on this particular cancer at the stage this boy had it at. I don't know enough about this particular illness, the treatments and this boy's history to really have a clear opinion........and I bet the judge doesn't know any of this stuff either. And, it is possible the parents may not know all the ins and outs of the odds of repeated chemo on this type and stage of cancer, either, who knows? The best bet would be to review everything and then talk to the boy. He does have a right to his own say. As long as he has gotten a proper education on this particular disease and given ALL his options. IF the chemo has a really good chance of saving his life (but, in this case, it seems one course has already failed, not a good sign for future treatment success in some cancers, but others do respond with second or even third or fouth rounds of chemo) then maybe, but if the child has a slim to no chance of survival, no matter what he does, then he should be left in peace, to die a peaceful death, without the side effects of Chemotherapy. The father's rather histrionic comments to the press are not helping the situation, though, IMO. It rubbed me the wrong way, and if the parents appeared histrionic in court, the judge could well have felt they didn't have the resources to deal with the illness in a mature manner or make good deisions. Often court cases rest on things which may appear very unimportant at first glance. The article didn't give us enough data to make a real judgement of our own, though, did it?
This boy and his family are friends of my moms. He nearly died from the last bout of chemo, and he says he knows he's going to die if he has to go through it again. He syas the treatment is so much worse than the disease, and if he's going to die, he would rather do it not filled up with poison. My mom says he very intelligent and has been researching alternative therapies extensively. There is a naturopathic doctor and nutritionist who is volunteering his time and services to assist the clinic in Mexico with his treatment. I really don't see it any different from forcing parents to vaccinate, or taking away children whose mamas birth at home, or arresting women who refuse to have a c-section, or circumcizing baby boys who have been placed in foster care against the parents wishes. Except this child is almost 17 and quite able to make his own choices. Even if the chemo was succesful, he would only have an 85% chance to survive for 5 more years. Is 5 more years worth the torture of chemo? I've seen my grandmother go through chemo, with breast cancer that had a very high survival rate. She was so weak, and so thin, I think at one point she weighed less than 75 pounds, and so sick and miserable. She had a very good chance of surviving, and did, for many, many years. This boy has 5 more years, at best, to look forward to. I think we need to take a good look at our culture, and why we are so afraid of dying, or letting others die in dignity. Nobody wants to see a 16 year old boy die, least of all, I'm sure, the boy and his parents.They must have done some serious soul-searching and have come to some sort of peace with the knowledge that his life is going to be short. I would think, faced with the knoweledge that your child is going to die, one would be hoping for a quality of the life they have left together and not a quantity of a few more years of a child too sick from chemo to enjoy anything, not even good food.
Simply because he is not a legal adult. I think I see where you're comming from. If he were an adult (and by this I also mean of normal intelligence and sound mental health), I would not agree with the decision.
If he were to kill someone or commit armed robbery or rape, he would be considered an adult in the eys of the court. Brighid, I think you hit the nail on the head:
I think that if this were his 1st round of Chemo, I'd agree with the judge. But seeing as this is his SECOND round... yeah, I dunno. From what I read it sounds like he's making a sound decision. Chemo round #1 didn't work, so why not try something else the second time. But I don't know enough about the disease to make an informed decision either. love, mom
Maybe in the United States, but that's not where I live. I live in Australia. Almost always, but not without the occasional exception, minors are treated as children and not tried as adults. Sometimes people who are legal adults are still tried as children (in exceptional circumstances).
He's not a child. He's old enough to make decisions regarding his body and what he wants to do with it. If he has all the facts, then he needs to chose for himself. Why do judges think they have a right to circumvent the wishes of an individual or his parents. My grandson had a rash all over his body. It was uncomfortable but not life threatening. The perscribed course of treatment was steroids that were known to stunt growth. Or they could treat the itchies and allow him to outgrow the condition in a few years. My grandson was a short child already. My son and his wife felt that it would be better for their son to deal with the rash rather than risk being an extremely short male. They felt this would be very hard for him to deal with as he grew up and the other kids would make fun of him for being short. I agreed with their decision. It was well thought out and certainly looking at the best interest of the child. Well the state got involved. They put the boy in a foster home, gave him the treatments, and then when the rash was better sent him back to his parents. Now he has to deal with being extremely short for the rest of his life AND the trama of the separation from his parents. All because someone disagreed with the parents right to chose what is best for their child. The courts need to stay out of situations like this and worry about real cases of child abuse. These parents and the boy have together made a decision that effects their lives and their family, no one else has a right to change that decision. If I were that boy I'd be gone from there real fast. Kathi
ok, but his parents, who are responsible for him untill he turns 18, are supporting his decision. i don't think their desisions should be second guessed. they know him better than anyone.
I guess I just see it as the government/courts trying to play god...and that can get pretty dangerous. It's like they are trying to control what goes on in our own homes...I feel like this is "1984" all over again.
Update: The order to force him to get chemo has been lifted. http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/judge-lifts-treatment-order-for-sick/20060725132409990006?_ccc=5&cid=842
I just saw this on the news like 2 minutes ago. This is horrible that they even tried to make him go through chemo. If this happened then our country is getting scarier by the day...If someone doesn't want to go through treatment, then let them be. They just wanted his money. They didn't care about him.
I don't know. If he can prove he is well aware of the different types of treatments available, what it might mean to his prognosis to decline chemo, I don't see why he can't make the choice on what goes on in his body. If he were a 4 year old child without the ability to process information of that type and make an educated decision about it, I could see the judge's position. I also agree that it's a slippery slope. Today I can make the choice about my kids' vaxs, it's only a matter of time before I get my butt thrown in jail because I didn't give them the chicken pox vaccine. :$ I'm afraid that as long as we live in this country with government that rules with their own personal agendas, it's a risk we take when we resist the "norm".
