FAITH OR MANDATORY TREATMENT?

by MullOverThis

 

A thirteen year old Minnesota boy is allegedly on the run with his mother to avoid chemotherapy treatment for Hodgkins Lymphoma, a highly treatable form of cancer with traditional chemotherapy and radiation treatments.  Mom and son allegedly prefer to treat the cancer naturally on religious grounds, because such treatment would involve violating their beliefs.

Judge Judy addressed the issue in a potluck style interview with Larry King and noted a number of  important factors.  A thirteen year old boy is of considerable age and as a family court judge, she would want to know the young boy’s desire.  Also, the young boy must have his own counsel to protect his own interests, irrespective of his parents and other interested parties. 

Mulloverthis thinks that this case is one in a line of many, that points to government imposition into socialist areas that break the bounds of individual rights.  The government, through the arms of the court, child welfare and social service agencies, should not mandate medical treatments based upon statistics. If I want to lay down and die from a tumor, that is my business.  A family who is otherwise well-balanced and informed should be able to choose what types of medical treatments, or lack thereof, they prefer.  Provided the parents are aware of optional treatments and have reasonable grounds for pursuing alternative treatments, they should be free to do so on any grounds. 

Consider this: the 13 year old boy could take the chemotherapy and die from the cancer. Meanwhile, he would have endured the torture of chemotherapy. If anyone is qualified to roll the dice on his life, it is his parents and those that love him.

Mulloverthis.

UPDATE:
http://news.aol.com/health/article/teen-who-fled-chemo/497263?icid=main|main|dl1|link3|http%3A%2F%2Fnews.aol.com%2Fhealth%2Farticle%2Fteen-who-fled-chemo%2F497263

Advertisements

One Comment to “FAITH OR MANDATORY TREATMENT?”

  1. I see your point. However, I think there are times when government should step in when the welfare of a child is at stake. If it is indeed a clear cut issue that an attempt at chemo and radiation would greatly improve the child’s chances for survival, the parents should be forced to step aside. Imagine a child in Anytown, USA being raised by parents with cockamamy ideas about health that border on quackery. I would definintely want someone to step in and save me.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: