mom fled with son after court orders him to get chemo

[ChefChiTown]

How sad that you actually believe that doctors always tell the truth. There have never been any stories to report the opposite. All the medical malpractice suits are all bullshit because doctors can't be wrong.

How sad is it that there are parents out there that put an out-dated religious tradition in front of the life of their child? How sad is it that people actually believe that there are these magical, all-powerful and all-knowing gods that will save them from things like cancer?

Medical doctors can be wrong sometimes, but they are right more often than not. To deny yourself medical care because of some old-fashioned and out-dated religious tradition is idiotic. It's just absolutely ridiculous when people think that God (or whatever idol they worship) will save them when they are in need.

If some god was really looking out for this 13 year old boy, he wouldn't have cancer in the first place. Yet, these people want to act like everything is God's will and that receiving medical treatment (which could save this child's life) is the wrong thing to do. No, the wrong thing to do is let your religious pride get in the way, which is exactly what these parents are doing, and completely deny your child of having a decent chance of survival. He doesn't have a cut on his arm that will heal on it's own; he has cancer. He has cancer which will kill him if he doesn't get treated.

Is it guaranteed that the treatment will work? No. Is it guaranteed that denying treatment will kill this kid? Yes.

Option 1: Follow your ancient religious guidelines and deny any sort of medical assistance. Let the cancer slowly eat away at this child's body, eventually crippling him to the point of a painful and agonizing death.

Option 2: Put aside your religious pride and let your child receive treatment, giving him a decent chance of living a full, healthy and normal life.

Religious or not, that's not a hard decision to make, especially when your child's life is the one hanging in the balance.

:2 cents:

 

[TwatDetective]

Personally, I am very anti-government and for personal choice and responsibility. I am pro-euthanasia, pro-choice, for ending the drug war, for lowing the drinking age, pro-gay marriage, pro-second amendment, etc, etc, I could go on and on.

I think consenting adults should be able to do whatever the fuck they want to themselves or other consenting adults.

Kids don't know any better , though. Parents have a responsibility to care for their kids but they don't own them, and they can fail to live up to that responsibility.

Oh, and all my doctor friends, and trust me I have a lot of them, probably more than you, say the opposite.:rofl::rofl:

 

[STDiva]

This kid WILL die if he doesn't get chemotherapy.

Or

This kid COULD die if he gets the chemotherapy.

I'm not a betting man, but I think I like the odds.

BTW. See what religion does? Kills little kids.

 

[dogbone27]

How sad is it that there are parents out there that put an out-dated religious tradition in front of the life of their child? How sad is it that people actually believe that there are these magical, all-powerful and all-knowing gods that will save them from things like cancer?

Medical doctors can be wrong sometimes, but they are right more often than not. To deny yourself medical care because of some old-fashioned and out-dated religious tradition is idiotic. It's just absolutely ridiculous when people think that God (or whatever idol they worship) will save them when they are in need.

If some god was really looking out for this 13 year old boy, he wouldn't have cancer in the first place. Yet, these people want to act like everything is God's will and that receiving medical treatment (which could save this child's life) is the wrong thing to do. No, the wrong thing to do is let your religious pride get in the way, which is exactly what these parents are doing, and completely deny your child of having a decent chance of survival. He doesn't have a cut on his arm that will heal on it's own; he has cancer. He has cancer which will kill him if he doesn't get treated.

Is it guaranteed that the treatment will work? No. Is it guaranteed that denying treatment will kill this kid? Yes.

Option 1: Follow your ancient religious guidelines and deny any sort of medical assistance. Let the cancer slowly eat away at this child's body, eventually crippling him to the point of a painful and agonizing death.

Option 2: Put aside your religious pride and let your child receive treatment, giving him a decent chance of living a full, healthy and normal life.

Religious or not, that's not a hard decision to make, especially when your child's life is the one hanging in the balance.

:2 cents:

This. It have been know for years that natural remedies doesn't do shit, it all just a bunch of hocus pocus to scam and scared people to keep them in check, to follow their religion. Hey, as ChefChiTown said, Dr may not always be right but most of the time they are and it seem in the case of this 13 year old teenager, that they are.

 

[Will E Worm]

This. It have been know for years that natural remedies doesn't do shit,

Are you from the FDA?

I have used home remedies many times and they have worked.
Much better than synthetic drugs.

 

[neighborboy]

To [sic] bad some of you want the government to control what we do.

Who is "we" here? The government is trying to stop a parent from hurting her child. This crazy mother can believe and do anything she wants, but once she starts harming her kid, it's no longer her business alone. Children are not property. The freedoms we should be worrying about are the child's not the crazy mother's.

In this case, the government has decided that this 13 year old boy does not have an understanding of the situation necessary to make an informed decision about his medial treatment. Based on articles I have read, the kid is home-schooled and functionally illiterate, which would at least partly explain why he doesn't understand his situation. Once he turns 18 and he decides he doesn't want to have medical care anymore, that's fine.

 

[Will E Worm]

Children are not property.

They are under the control of their parents, not the government or the state.

So yes, they are their parents responsibility and the parents will decide what to do with their child.

 

[thebear247]

when a kid gets in trouble by the law or gets sued who take the blame ? the parent . whos job is it to feed the kids ? answer the parents . who puts clothing on there backs and roof over there head answer the parents ? if the mom and child dont want chemo he should have that right . the goverment just dont want a bunch of free thinking people running around making there own choices they want the control and the power over everyone

 

[neighborboy]

when a kid gets in trouble by the law or gets sued who take the blame ?

I must have missed the law that says parents go to jail when children commit crimes. I guess you support the rights of parents to beat their children too?

 

[thebear247]

I must have missed the law that says parents go to jail when children commit crimes. I guess you support the rights of parents to beat their children too?

no just making a statemeant a kid belongs to there parents not the goverment

and yes i do think parents should have the right to SPANK there kids not BEAT them maybe we wouldnt have so many out of control teenage brats who show no respect for the law of other people

 

[Jane Burgess]

Personally, I am very anti-government and for personal choice and responsibility. I am pro-euthanasia, pro-choice, for ending the drug war, for lowing the drinking age, pro-gay marriage, pro-second amendment, etc, etc, I could go on and on.

I think consenting adults should be able to do whatever the fuck they want to themselves or other consenting adults.

Kids don't know any better , though. Parents have a responsibility to care for their kids but they don't own them, and they can fail to live up to that responsibility.

Oh, and all my doctor friends, and trust me I have a lot of them, probably more than you, say the opposite.:rofl::rofl:

I highly doubt that you have more doctor friends than I. When I was in college most of my friends were all in med school. Unless you have over 30 friends that are doctors, you lose. Then again the friends I have do not have a God complex like many doctors have. I love your user name on here. You live up to it perfectly with your postings.

 

[Jane Burgess]

Are you from the FDA?

I have used home remedies many times and they have worked.
Much better than synthetic drugs.

Nice post. I love how people think home remedies can't work. They seem to forget they have worked for thousands of years. Long before chemo and other drugs existed. There was a time before the drug companies took over. :wave2:

 

[BlueBalls]

Are you from the FDA?

I have used home remedies many times and they have worked.
Much better than synthetic drugs.

So you have had Hodgkin's lymphoma and have cured it with natural remedies? Or known someone who has done the same? Please regail us with this information because I'm sure many many people would want to hear it.

But you havent have you, treating headaches and other minor ailments is not the same as treating cancer, so to even try to use your experiences with natural medicine with those who have a serious life threatening disorder is no where near a fair comparison.

I have serious doubts about the effectiveness of natural remedies when used to cure anything. Modern medicine is not the enemy as so many people seem to believe.

I'm going to reiterate my point from my original post:

Most patients who are able to be successfully treated (and thus enter remission) generally go on and live long and normal lives, due to a remission success rate of 90% to 95%. This is only the case if it's caught early, in going "on the run" with her son all she is doing is handing him a death sentence.

 

[Jane Burgess]

So you have had Hodgkin's lymphoma and have cured it with natural remedies? Or known someone who has done the same? Please regail us with this information because I'm sure many many people would want to hear it.

But you havent have you, treating headaches and other minor ailments is not the same as treating cancer, so to even try to use your experiences with natural medicine with those who have a serious life threatening disorder is no where near a fair comparison.

I have serious doubts about the effectiveness of natural remedies when used to cure anything. Modern medicine is not the enemy as so many people seem to believe.

I'm going to reiterate my point from my original post:

Most patients who are able to be successfully treated (and thus enter remission) generally go on and live long and normal lives, due to a remission success rate of 90% to 95%. This is only the case if it's caught early, in going "on the run" with her son all she is doing is handing him a death sentence.

This is a very tough story. One one hand, I want the boy to get treatment and get better. On the other hand I do not like the government telling anyone they have to get medical treatment. I think it should be a choice, not be forced on a person. There are stories of people with Hodgkin's Lymphoma that did not have the chemo and they survived. Even in the link the OP posted they talk about a man that did not do chemo as a child and used natural remedies and he is fine.

I do not think modern medicine is the enemy. I think more people are annoyed that the government is trying to force a parent to get a treatment for their son they do not want him to have. I also think in the society we live in, medication is handed out like candy.

 

[lovejoy]

[QUOTE=thebear247;3240900]http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30824587/?GT1=43001

i dont know touchy subject but if he dont want too then thats his right[/QUOTE]

This is NOT a touchy subject at all.

Hodgkins Disease is the cancer of the lymphatic system in which lymph cells form cancer cells and the kid will die.

It is religious right of mighty GOD vs. all mighty powerful GOD created by man and the laws written by men.

I think the parent (mother) has the right to say NO ! She has the right to abort the child (fetus) in her womb and now should she has the way to say NO !

It is state's right vs the right of minors over the parental right.

The Government intrudes into our bedroom, 24 hours surviellance even when you take the subway, bus or driving.

Cameras are everywhere in downtown London and many other major cities.

We live in a society when something goes wrong, the government officials/agents, managers, operational managers, section managers blame it on the parents, the employees, the taxpayers.

We no longer have a voice !

This has nothing to do with doctors but the state right over control of a child vs. the parental right over her "own" child. If the mother has the right to kill the fetus when it is in her womb which is called abortion and perfectly legal, then she has the right to say NO to the state/province.

 

[neighborboy]

I think more people are annoyed that the government is trying to force a parent to get a treatment for their son they do not want him to have.

But why should a mother get to decide to essentially kill her child?

I'd be more sympathetic if the success rate for this treatment was only say 10%. Then I'd say "yeah, at that point the pain and suffering might not be worth it and parents should be able to decide." But for treatments with such high success rates, I'm with the courts here in thinking that a child's rights to mature into an adult capable of making decisions for him or herself outweighs the religious "rights" of the family, just as religious "rights" would not authorize a family to marry off their 9-year old daughter, even if she "consented" to it.

 

[TwatDetective]

I highly doubt that you have more doctor friends than I. When I was in college most of my friends were all in med school. Unless you have over 30 friends that are doctors, you lose. Then again the friends I have do not have a God complex like many doctors have. I love your user name on here. You live up to it perfectly with your postings.

I have 31 doctor friends.

I was poking fun at you. If I used that in an argument it would be a logical fallacy.

TwatDetective is a fitting name since I can really zero in on the cunts.
Oh, and vaginas, too.

 

[lovejoy]

The next thing is the state gathers all the information who visits Freeones.com and they are put into watchful list and deeds dangerous to the society because anyone watches porn are "at risk" to commit sex crime. The state and its agents, the crown corporation and ministry/department intrudes into our bedroom and do 24 hours surveillance even when we take the bus, the subway and take a walk.

 

[Jane Burgess]

But why should a mother get to decide to essentially kill her child?

I'd be more sympathetic if the success rate for this treatment was only say 10%. Then I'd say "yeah, at that point the pain and suffering might not be worth it and parents should be able to decide." But for treatments with such high success rates, I'm with the courts here in thinking that a child's rights to mature into an adult capable of making decisions for him or herself outweighs the religious "rights" of the family, just as religious "rights" would not authorize a family to marry off their 9-year old daughter, even if she "consented" to it.

There lies the question. Why does the government have the right to say they are superior to a persons religious beliefs? This mother is not refusing all treatments for her son, she wants to try natural remedies. It isn't like she is not willing to try something. Just because you or I may not like what she is doing does not mean it is wrong. Pretty soon the right to choose anything is not going to be allowed.

 

[Jane Burgess]

I have 31 doctor friends.

I was poking fun at you. If I used that in an argument it would be a logical fallacy.

TwatDetective is a fitting name since I can really zero in on the cunts.
Oh, and vaginas, too.

Yeah I know. This subject I guess is a bit touchy for me. I have had cancer before. I chose the treatment I did because I thought it would work for me and it did. I just want people to have that same option. The right to choose your own medical care is such a personal act. I would never to be forced to do any treatment I did not want.