Court ordered Chemo for 13 year old boy

maluchm · May 20, 2009

What the heck is this world coming too? A court in MN ordered that the 13 year old boy and his family must go through traditional Chemo treatment for Lymphoma. The family wanted to try and different form of treatment instead. Now there is a warrant out for the Mom.

:face-icon-small-sad

ArcticBoy · May 20, 2009

Mom sounds like a wacko, but making them do anything they don't want to do??? I sure hate to see the kid die when it is a disease that has a high rate of cure with chemo. But it's their choice I guess.

yammadog · May 20, 2009

Tough decision for sure......The technology is probably in favor of saving the boy, but it's their decision and nobody should be able to take that away from the people!!

Super B · May 20, 2009

Now the son and mother are on the lamb. Great parenting skills...

http://www.startribune.com/local/45427417.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O

W3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aU1yDEmP:QMDCinchO7DU

Himark · May 20, 2009

No tough decision for me. Treatment is available even if a long shot he is getting it. He is a KID not a 50 year old guy that has some life behind him.

I can vouge with personal experience with this and I will offend some J-dubs here but I REALLY dont care. 1987 my GF at the time sister got sprayed by a aerial applicator along with her best friend while de-tassling. They BOTH got a blood infection. One girl went and got a blood transfusion and the others parents would NOT allow her to. 100% recovery for the one and my GF sister passed away in a short time.

RIP, Leah Dawson 17 years old.

This boy NEEDS treatment period.

maluchm · May 20, 2009

yammadog said:
Tough decision for sure......The technology is probably in favor of saving the boy, but it's their decision and nobody should be able to take that away from the people!!

This is my opinion on the matter as well. The method of treatment should be left to either the patient and/or the patient's family depending if it's a minor like in this case. It's my understanding that they are not refusing to treat the Lymphoma but use a method that is just not mainstream and more holistic and natural. To each their own but for a court to step in a tell them is BS.

Lots of money involved with traditional chemo, radiation and all the tests that come along on a regular basis. I sure hope this had nothing to do with the decision to try and force this upon the family.

"Minnesota Court Orders Chemotherapy for 13-Year-Old
We have an update to an article we published in last week’s issue of Pulse of Heath Freedom. A judge has now ruled that Daniel Hauser, a 13-year-old boy from Sleepy Eye, Minnesota, must receive conventional medical treatment for Hodgkin’s lymphoma—over his parents’ objections. The Hausers, who live on a dairy farm, prefer natural medicines and alternative treatments for illnesses. Daniel received one round of chemotherapy after strong recommendations from the medical community. That one round of chemotherapy resulted in an extended stay in the hospital, and from that point on, only natural treatments have been administered.

AAHF has long advocated for the right of consumers to choose which modality of treatment works best for them. We believe that such choices are not a government matter. Executive Director Gretchen DuBeau commented, “I am shocked at the court’s ruling. For the court to take custody, disregard the parents’ right to parent, and dismiss the child’s own wishes is a travesty. Our Constitution affords certain rights, and the court has completely trampled on them. It is still unclear as to what exactly ‘the compelling state interest’ is that the court used to justify this ruling.”

The Hauser family has until May 19 to have a chest x-ray and see an oncologist. The Hausers conducted extensive research into various treatments prior to their decision to seek a natural, non-toxic approach to treat Daniel’s cancer."

ArcticBoy · May 20, 2009

I know if it was my son he would be getting the best care available. Looks like 2 choices here. Live or die. Meanwhile the tumor keeps growing.

redlineguy · May 20, 2009

Good read.

http://www.snowest.com/forum/showthread.php?t=151990

.

swampwater · May 20, 2009

70% of oncologists polled said they would never take chemotherapy if they got cancer. There are natural cures 10,000 times stronger than chemo and many other extremely effective natural cures but the federalies at the FDA are under the influence of big pharmacy. 70% of oncologists income comes from the sale of the chemo drugs. If chemo is so great why did President ReagaN GO to Germany in the mid 80's to have his cancer cured, how about Cher and Suzzanne Summers. The cancer industry is as big a scam as global warming. I would recomend anyone with cancer do the research and they will lose their fear as there are therapies that cost no more than 1 1/2 cents per day. My rant but I have bveen fighting this issue for 30 years. Swampy

skid · May 20, 2009

This is taking place 45 minutes away from me. I think he should have to, if they don't and he dies then they could always sue somene?

maluchm · May 20, 2009

skid said:
This is taking place 45 minutes away from me. I think he should have to, if they don't and he dies then they could always sue somene?

Sue who and for what?

Super B · May 20, 2009

Looks like the boy and Mom have fled the country.

http://www.startribune.com/local/45489212.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O

W3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aU1yDEmP:QMDCinchO7DU

phatty · May 20, 2009

What kind of country dictates a response to an illness?

Should the government tell you that when you have a head ache that you must use asprin and not IB profun?

If we allow a child/mother to decide if they want treatment or not, should we also allow a mother/child to decide when to end a pregnancy by abortion?

There are so many factors involved here, and reading the news (media interpretations of events, biased by their opinions) does not give any of us the whole story.

This case has some interesting implications that could reach far and wide for a long long time...

IMO in the case of a child, it is a family decision. I personally dont want government telling me how or when i take care of my kids... oh wait, they already do...

motojunkie101 · May 20, 2009

wonder if the cancer was caused by eating the lead in his minibike?

I'm with phatty, the government might try, but they will NOT tell me how to raise my children.

Granted the parents may be a little wacked, but that is another point all together.

UintaVentureBoys · May 20, 2009

I had a friend who developed lieukemia and he went through the chemotherapy.. it killed him after 2 years of solid chemo.. my brother went to school with a kid who also had lieukemia and he went with the more natural forms of treatment (not sure what they are) but that kid is still alive today and he's been recieving treatment for over 8 years... now you tell me whats the best route.. i don't blame the parents one bit, i would do the same thing! chemo is a very painful and body destroying treatment, not only does it weaken the immune system to a point of nothing at all, it destroys many cells in your body that are your basic defenses agains such diseases as cancer.. replace the defenses that god gave you to fight cancer and replace it with radiation??? makes no sense at all to me.. the court should be prosecuted for issuing such warrants and takeing away civil rights

xrated · May 21, 2009

maluchm said:
What the heck is this world coming too? A court in MN ordered that the 13 year old boy and his family must go through traditional Chemo treatment for Lymphoma. The family wanted to try and different form of treatment instead. Now there is a warrant out for the Mom. :face-icon-small-sad

mom and dad sound whacko. and the group they follow.

not sure how i feel about the courts saying this...but as someone said on the radio in MN, what's the difference between a family claiming religous reasons etc for skipping chemo and claiming the same reasons for incest? Again not sure how I feel but it's a good point.

AmericanOutlaw · May 21, 2009

If the parents opted for no treatment I would say the courts should go for it.Considering they want a more natural treatment i think the gov is out of line.

maluchm · May 21, 2009

AmericanOutlaw said:
If the parents opted for no treatment I would say the courts should go for it.Considering they want a more natural treatment i think the gov is out of line.

Exactly! The courts have no frickin business deciding what form or treatment for a patient. It's a completely different story if the patient or patients family in this case decides to opt out of all treatment, mainstream or not. But then again, should they still be able to force someone to go through hell and back with a 30% survival rate?

I have no idea really about the parents and if they are wacko or not. The question here simply is should the courts be allowed to do this????

duffman · May 21, 2009

This woman is crazy, as stated above an adult can make their own decisions but this is a KID! Chemotherapy is proven by science to work. Wholistic medicine, natural-pathic, alternative treatment, whatever you want to call it is pure quakery and kills people. IMO practitioners of wholistic medicine should be prosecuted for murder in cases where patients die for not receiving real treatment, along with this crazy broad if the kid dies.

Disco Dan Richter · May 21, 2009

It is not up to the government or justice system to dictate what goes on in Americans lives in private.
That being said, the lady is a whacko! If she cant give him what he needs to live, it is her son, but she should give up the "god cures all" attitude and help her kid.

Court ordered Chemo for 13 year old boy

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

MODERATOR: Premium Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads