I work in health care (though not in oncology), and no one here has mentioned a provider's perspective. Honestly, if I were an oncologist, I'd be loathe to treat a patient under these circumstances. Chemo is a complicated, on-going process, requiring monitoring for side effects, and regular testing to determine the response. Medication dosing and schedules often must be adjusted. A strong, committed doctor-patient relationship is a must. Treating someone who is resentful and uncooperative could be disastrous. Just because the court ordered treatment doesn't mean she'll find a specialist who'll agree to provide it. Personally, I can't imagine treating a hostile, unwilling patient without a court order myself.
Which brings up another point. Should a physician be subject to contempt of court for refusing to treat a patient against her will? Don't medical providers have rights, too?
Where is the medical evidence of alternative treatments that cure cancer. Solid, quantitative evidence from a properly certified source, not some quack website.
Amazingly, I have seen half a dozen people in my life be saved from an early death by surgery and chemo. I guess they must be rarities.
Manipulate L4 & L5?
That is totally untrue. Survival rates are tracked up to 20 years after treatment with five and ten years considered significant.
Different cancers have different causes including certain viruses and environmental causes such as asbestos and smoking, but cancers may recur which is why they are tracked. It is also possible to get an unrelated cancer.
Unfortunately, the patient is a minor, and will likely both become 18 and have to submit to the treatment (or escape) before a proper appeal can be had. I disagree with the Court, because it asks the wrong question. It asks, "Is this person of sufficient age, maturity and experience to make an informed decision as to her own medical treatment?" The court concludes that the patient is not sufficiently mature while relying upon a collateral and irrelevant matter, the decision itself.
Did C investigate multiple therapies for her condition? yes
Did she ask questions about costs, side effects, prognoses, etc.? yes
Was C under some kind of delusion, duress, mental infirmity that prohibited her from thinking logically and rationally? No evidence (note that the issue is whether or not she had the ability to think logically and rationally, whether she does so is her choice.)
Other than the decision itself, and her resistance to the heavy handed actions of the trial court and DFACs, is there anyway in which she investigated, considered and chose between the options then available to her that differs in any material way from what a mature, experienced, rational person similarly situated would have done?
And if there is no material difference, then by what right does the State presume the power to invade a private citizen's body against her will? Relying on the legal fiction of the age of majority is both cowardly and substantially unjust.
Source?
Generally yes, when it comes to minors.I can see now that it was the folk on the ground and in the court who saw the various characters face to face.
Do we trust those medical and police folk then court judges to make wise decisions in all that happened?
The Original Post which stated that C and her mother wanted to pursue alternative treatments that didn't involve putting the "poison" of chemotherapy in her body.
Which does NOT show they actually have done any real investigation.
Artemis97 said they presented no such evidence in either of 2 court appearances and knowing her tendencies I can safely say she will be able to show real evidence to that effect.
They never got the chance. CPS was called when the mom suggested getting a second opinion and then the teen ran away. Then CPS came and got her.
They had every chance. CPS was called after a number of missed appointments and the kid running away. During all of that time they could have sought a second opinion. They did not. As far as I know there is nothing stopping them now from getting a second opinion, they just cannot stop treatment while doing that, which is perfectly reasonable in the case of cancer.
Hi,I need to find the article I was reading, because I read a totally different story.
“There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.”
Think I got it. Is one more obvious or at least more common than the other?
Isaac had it right.This thread reminds me of a quote by Isaac Asimov.
There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.
If it's a secret, how do you know about it? I'm always curious to learn how these big secrets and conspiracies are generally known by the whole, entire public.As to vitamins and other "natural stuff" being poison, excuse me, but drugs have killed way more folks than the natural way ever has. The FDA and AMA don't want people to know this, it is kept a secret, but, so many hospital deaths a year are caused by drugs, it is a disgrace.