Do you think chemotherapy should be forced on minors?

Discussion in 'Law & Justice' started by The Amazing Sam's Ego, Feb 14, 2015.

  1. The Amazing Sam's Ego

    The Amazing Sam's Ego Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    Messages:
    10,262
    Likes Received:
    283
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I'm sure many people heard the case in Conneticut where some doctors reported a teen to CPS for not taking chemo, and rather than making a smart decision about the case and realizing that it had harmful effects, the judge made a court order that she had to take it. Here's some more facts about related cases, and facts about the medical industry in general, as it connects to this topic.

    http://www.whale.to/v/horwin1.html-Read the entire, or at least parts of that link if you want to get more info about this topic, but I'll post a few quotes from it that are important for the thread topic.

    http://www.whale.to/horwin.html

    Should chemotherapy have its classification changed and alternative treatments should replace it as cancer curing agents? Yes, I believe so, since other treatments cure cancer even better than chemo based on studies (unfortunately doctors in medical industry would get in trouble if they say that), but that's a separate topic from this thread, but it can be discussed if it pertains to it. Here's what I want to discuss in this thread.

    Basically, since the medical system classifies chemo as the cancer cure and other treatments as ineffective, due to the greed of the medical industry (basically chemo gives them a lot of money), there have been court cases in the news where doctors reported parents who refused to give their kids chemo to the courts, and the courts have forced them to take it.

    I believe, unfortunately, due to the laws about minors being required to have life saving medical treatment (good laws) combined with the side effect of toxic chemo being classified as the best cancer cure and other agents as inferior, the judges and doctors in those situations are forced to give kids chemo, and many of them probably only do what they do because of legal precedent.

    First of all, I think the doctors in the Connecticut situation did the wrong thing by doing that and they should've allowed Cassandra to take alternative treatment without getting the law involved, but that's beside the point-these situations wouldnt exist if laws about minors and chemo were changed.

    Chemotherapy being considered the cure for cancer is a legal medical status that exists for profit-and I think it's unjust that a side effect of the law creates situations where doctors are forced to give certain age groups that toxic treatment if they dont want it. There should be freedom of choice.

    I'm sure there are a handful of cases of judges allowing alternative treatment-I've read one article in the news about that, but theyre probably an exception. There probably are many judges who feel a certain way about this issue are unfortunately probably too afraid to go outside legal guidelines and precedent in medical situations-and that's an unfortunate side effect of what the medical industry does.

    But I believe chemotherapy, because of its harmful side effects, should be optional and legislation should be passed removing it from mandatory medical treatment of minors.

    Even if somebody tried passing a law like that, it probably wouldnt work, and companies are probably the reason only a few states allow it-they'd lose a lot of profits if people from a certain age demographic wasnt forced to take it. I'm not saying my opinion will change laws-I'm just stating my beliefs.

    Any thoughts?
     
  2. The Amazing Sam's Ego

    The Amazing Sam's Ego Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    Messages:
    10,262
    Likes Received:
    283
    Trophy Points:
    83
  3. Steady Pie

    Steady Pie Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    24,506
    Likes Received:
    7,247
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Children are, in my opinion, the toughest issue in politics.

    It's at the extremes of bodily sovereignty and the such. Seems to me it should be up to the child, but if the parent wants to strap them down by force and forcibly inject such poisons into their body, then that's their choice equally.
     
  4. The Amazing Sam's Ego

    The Amazing Sam's Ego Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    Messages:
    10,262
    Likes Received:
    283
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I agree with you and understand your opinion, but that's not what I was talking about in the OP. In the OP, I was talking about courts forcing kids (against the will of them and their parents) forcing them to take it.
     
  5. Steady Pie

    Steady Pie Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2012
    Messages:
    24,506
    Likes Received:
    7,247
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Oh yeah - I didn't even consider the state in that equation haha. How absurd - the only issue is whether the kid or the parent should get the say.
     
  6. Phoebe Bump

    Phoebe Bump New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2010
    Messages:
    26,347
    Likes Received:
    172
    Trophy Points:
    0
    There may be an argument vis-a-vis medulloblastoma, by my wife is LIVING proof that chemo and radiation are highly effective.

    What does that mean?
     
  7. The Amazing Sam's Ego

    The Amazing Sam's Ego Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    Messages:
    10,262
    Likes Received:
    283
    Trophy Points:
    83
    How many other people do you know that survived chemo? From what I know, less than 10% survive.
     
  8. Battle3

    Battle3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2013
    Messages:
    16,248
    Likes Received:
    3,012
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The govt should stay out of it. Let the parents and child decide, they have to live with the consequences.

    If a parent with cancer has the right to decide whether to accept treatment and what treatment to take - chemo, radiation, surgery, natural, or a combination - then the parent and child should have the same right to choose or reject a treatment. Its their body, they have to live with the consequences.

    Now, go to the other extreme. If the parent and child have the right to reject cancer treatment, why don't they have the right to reject a vaccination? Now I suspect a lot of people who think a person should be able to reject cancer treatment will have no problem forcing that same person to be injected with a vaccine. For those people, were is the line between free choice and govt intrusion? There is no line, its all or nothing, once you violate the integrity of a right, then it is no longer a right.

    Or how about selling organs? I'll bet a lot of people who support free choice for cancer treatment will want to ban that same person from selling an organ.

    If we truly respect people, their rights, including their property rights, then you have to let people have the freedom to do things you don't like.
     
  9. Anders Hoveland

    Anders Hoveland Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,044
    Likes Received:
    138
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Doctors (especially in the U.S.) are notorious for saying certain courses of medical treatment are "necessary", when the reality is more complex.

    Just some examples... When something is wrong, and doctors do not know what else to do, they often resort to removing organs. Or they routinely remove organs & body parts for preventative reasons, when it is not really necessary. Common body parts include tonsils, wisdom teeth, the male foreskin, the appendix, spleen, etc. Pregnant women with medical conditions are often told they need to get an abortion, when that simply is not the case (see link here).
     
  10. Jarlaxle

    Jarlaxle Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2010
    Messages:
    8,939
    Likes Received:
    461
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    I watched two people get chemo. One stopped after one treatment, the other went through the whole thing. He died in agony after 2 years as an invalid, regretted every second of it, and was begging his siblings to shoot him.
     
  11. The Amazing Sam's Ego

    The Amazing Sam's Ego Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2013
    Messages:
    10,262
    Likes Received:
    283
    Trophy Points:
    83
    What treatment did he get after chemo?
     
  12. Jarlaxle

    Jarlaxle Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2010
    Messages:
    8,939
    Likes Received:
    461
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    As far as I know, none. He died in a car crash about 3 months later.
     
  13. waltky

    waltky Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    30,071
    Likes Received:
    1,204
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Well, mebbe...
    :confusion:
    Mice Help Find the Right Chemotherapy Treatment for Cancer Patients
    February 03, 2017 | WASHINGTON — Some people are turning to laboratory mice to find out what drugs might work best for their type of cancer. That's what Eileen Youtie of Miami, Florida did.
    See also:

    Europe's Oncologists Back Biosimilar Versions of Cancer Drugs
    January 18, 2017 - Europe's leading association of oncologists has thrown its weight behind cheaper copycat versions of biotech cancer drugs that have lost patent protection, saying they are effective and affordable.
     
  14. CourtJester

    CourtJester Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Messages:
    27,769
    Likes Received:
    4,921
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Christian Scientists prove that parents and or children are not always competent to make life or death decisions. And actually the entire conflict over vaccinations proves that a lot of citizens are not competant to make rational decisions where health is concerned.

    I think it is fine to allow ignorant people to make decisions regarding their own health ( note smoking, junk food, alcoholism, and drug use) but letting them decide for children somehow just doesn't seem like a really good idea.
     
  15. Woogs

    Woogs Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2011
    Messages:
    8,382
    Likes Received:
    2,556
    Trophy Points:
    113
    From my reading, brain cancers are especially hard to treat due to the density of the tissues.

    I didn't much look beyond that as my focus was on breast and lung cancer, both of which my wife has been diagnosed with in the last 2 years.

    That being said, all cancers have some things in common and there are some things that have been shown to have cancer-fighting properties.

    What we have done is let the Dr treat my wife with traditional cancer therapies and are using a couple of supplements in hopes of preventing a recurrance.

    I would probably do much the same with a brain cancer and hope for the best. The problem is that cancer treatment is so specialized that most oncologists don't consider more natural therapies in conjunction with conventional treatment. The thinking is so compartmentalized.
     
  16. AlNewman

    AlNewman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2015
    Messages:
    2,987
    Likes Received:
    105
    Trophy Points:
    63
    First off, let me start with chemo, an extremely toxic substance. The body has cancer because of a deficiency in the immune system. Now cancer is not caused because the body has a lack of Chemo, so how can this be a cure, it isn't. The hope with this toxic chemical is that it kills cancer before it kills the patient, most of the time the patient goes first.

    Second, radiation is a know carcinogen that causes cancer. To somehow believe that a causation is somehow a cure is just pure idiocy. Radiation not only destroys the cancerous cells but any cells in the path of the radiation and also compromises the immune system.

    Third and most critically, the goal of this style of "medicine" is not to cure but to keep a patient alive as long as possible. If the patient actually lives (subjective not objective) for 5 years, the treatment is considered a success. On average a cancer patient is worth $50,000 a year. There are now more medical personal making a living off cancer than there are patients.

    Now to the meat of the subject, why would any parent want any of this for their child? But more critical, by what authority does some mystical "GOD" in a black robe have to deprive a parent of the love and judgement to do what they believe right for their offspring by informed decision? And by what moral right does some doctor get to give a child the pure misery of these toxins because they want to make more money?

    If in doubt, one only need to follow the money trail to find the real factors.
     
  17. FreshAir

    FreshAir Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    Messages:
    150,188
    Likes Received:
    62,819
    Trophy Points:
    113
    no one shoudl be forced to get chemo.. period, chemo is not 100% and it can also kill you or ruin you equality of life... it's a gamble
     
  18. btthegreat

    btthegreat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2010
    Messages:
    16,381
    Likes Received:
    7,057
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Children do not have the right to contract or to marry or to get drunk next Thursday or to refuse to attend school for a reason. we sort of assume a lack of long term planning or risk assessment management in their thinking process. Now does that mean children cannot make this decision? No, it means that we give parents a primary responsibility in understanding what frame of mind and maturity their child is at. I think that works as a basic framework in health care as well -unless there exist such creatures in our land as negligent, indifferent or incompetent parents. We know that such creatures do exist, and we must assume on rare occasion, they will have children with severe and possibly terminal conditions.

    I will put it this way, there should be a very heavy burden put on the state to prove, before they can interfere with the decisions of Mom, Dad and their kids. This issue is should be no different -except that it is both time sensitive and far heavier in consequence than most any.
     
  19. Le Chef

    Le Chef Banned at members request Donor

    Joined:
    May 31, 2015
    Messages:
    10,688
    Likes Received:
    3,816
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'd let a jury decide after hearing all the facts. It's a hard decision, but some parents may have good reasons and others may be ignorant or whacko. Let juries decide on case by case basis.
     
  20. Moonglow

    Moonglow Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2013
    Messages:
    20,754
    Likes Received:
    8,047
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    My wife had a brain tumor and it worked for her.
     
    Le Chef likes this.
  21. Wen

    Wen Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2017
    Messages:
    54
    Likes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Gender:
    Female
    I don't think they should be forced to do chemotherapy.
    Their parents should make a decision.
     
    Moonglow likes this.

Share This Page