Arrest ordered for mom of boy, 13, resisting chemo

[Disney Doll]

Well, considering that I seem to be the only one in the world who thinks the Travoltas were in the wrong for not trying one of the twelve other anti-seizure meds available for kids, I have to agree with the judge.

No you're not. I think they were wrong too. But I also think they had a hard time admitting that their beautiful child (and he was a beuatiful child) had some issues.

 

[Eeyores Butterfly]

Not everybody who has seen a loved one die desite the best efforts of doctors think that chemo is horrible.

My aunt had a very nasty form of ovarian cancer and went through a hystrectemy, chemo, and radiation. There were tkimes when it was hard on her and the treatment itself put her in the hospital.

By the grace of God the chemo bought her several years. It allowed her to see her second daughter married and to be around for the birth of that same daugher's child. The cancer eventually returned and they did everything they could but nothing could help. But we are all grateful that she tried. We know that she tried everything and are not left with the pain of wondering what if? Of wondering would she still be alive? We are grateful for the time that chemo and radiation bought her, even if it wasn't always easy. And we recognize that sometimes despite their best efforts people die. That does not make the chemo itself a bad thing.

 

[Disney Doll]

I'm don't mean to argue, I'm playing Devil's Advocate (or something...)

At what point do people feel the state has a responsibility to the child to step in and save his life?

I think we'd all agree that if the child were being physically abused or neglected, the state should protect the child. What if the child needed a blood transfusion and the parents were Jehovah's Witnesses? What if the child had an easily treatable bacterial infection and the parents refused antibiotics? What if he had appendicitis and the parents refused surgery? What about the parents who starve their kids because they believe in some weird diet that isn't nutritionally sound? Where is the line?

I do believe parents should be the ones to choose what's right for their child (For example, I support the rights of parents to refuse immunizations for their children, although I disagree with that choice) but it's hard to know where the line is, at what point does the state step in?

Just food for thought

(and in this case, I do think the state is in the right, to save the child. The odds are so overwhelmingly in favor of a cure with proper treatment.)

I think in a case like this where there is pretty substantial evidence that this boy could be cured if he got the treatment, and parents are refusing the treatment, then it is time for the state to step in.

OTOH, if he had been fighting cancer for many years, being treated and was slowly losing ground and accpeted medical practice could "say" that he would probably die whether or not he got treatment...well, in that case, if the parents made a decision to stop, I wouldn't have a problem with that.

 

[Disney Doll]

Actually, no I wasn't. It's not a good idea to think you know what's going on in other people's heads and speak as if you're representing them.

It's obvious that people who've embraced the whole cancer/medical doctrine thing are going to have strong ideas about what's right (doctors and chemo) then those who've lost loved ones who did everything the doctor said to do and those loved ones still died. In some cases they died infinitely more horrible deaths because of chemo than if they'd just let the cancer run it's course or turned to alternative medicine.

If my comment infuriated you, I'm sorry. But at least you have a good idea of the emotion the other side is going through when you condemn them without knowing what they know.

Or because they're not doing things the way you think they should do them.

Not everyone in the entire world thinks Western medicine is the greatest thing since sliced bread. A little tolerance would be nice for those of us who think the "modern medicine" fanatics are just as backward as those fanatics believe we are.

If you're going to holler for that Mother's head when she attempts a different course, then I guess I'm going to holler for the doctor's head when he forces this child and their parents to do something they don't want to do.

And that's all I'm going to say about that.

First off, kiddo, if you think something written by who knows who on the Internet infuriates anyone, you hold yourself in some pretty high esteem.

If you think it's OK for a mother to choose a course of treatment for her child that has been proven not to be working, rather than trying a different course of treatment which might work becxause there is some pretty good factual information on its success, then clearly logical debate isn't going to happen here. Logic would be helpful...a logical mother would say "OK, I've tried it my way and that hasn't worked and my son is dying so perhaps I should try it their way". That's what a logical parent would do.

 

[TCPluto]

If and when this child dies on chemotherapy (or shortly afterward), the stupid doctor who forced it on him should be charged with murder.

But, like you, that's just my opinion.

Bumber, is that you?? You're statement makes abut that much sense, which, by the way, is none....

 

[TCPluto]

THis post makes me sick. I HAVE had a child undergo chemo and recover, and saw many, many children on the oncology floor receive horrible chemo, but go on to live long lives.

There is always a risk in treatment, but the oncologist will weight the risk of cure against the risk of treatment. I have heard oncologists tell parents that it was too late and not to do the chemo.

Do you understand that with conventional treatment this cancer is highly curable, without almost definitely fatal?

That's what Carly was going for, don't let it bother you. Every rational person knows the great succcess stories of chemo. It doesn't happen in every case, but it's still worth the attempt.

Some folks just are mean for the sake of being mean. It's who they are, it's what they do. Regardless of who they hurt along the way.

 

[DawnCt1]

Actually, no I wasn't. It's not a good idea to think you know what's going on in other people's heads and speak as if you're representing them.

It's obvious that people who've embraced the whole cancer/medical doctrine thing are going to have strong ideas about what's right (doctors and chemo) then those who've lost loved ones who did everything the doctor said to do and those loved ones still died. In some cases they died infinitely more horrible deaths because of chemo than if they'd just let the cancer run it's course or turned to alternative medicine.

If my comment infuriated you, I'm sorry. But at least you have a good idea of the emotion the other side is going through when you condemn them without knowing what they know.

Or because they're not doing things the way you think they should do them.

Not everyone in the entire world thinks Western medicine is the greatest thing since sliced bread. A little tolerance would be nice for those of us who think the "modern medicine" fanatics are just as backward as those fanatics believe we are.

If you're going to holler for that Mother's head when she attempts a different course, then I guess I'm going to holler for the doctor's head when he forces this child and their parents to do something they don't want to do.

And that's all I'm going to say about that.

Carley, I understand how you feel. My Mom died of breast cancer. She did everything 'right'. She was moderate in her diet, didn't drink, didn't smoke, had no bad habits; she had bad luck. She was also unlucky in that she was one of the 20% whose breast tumors do not visualize on the mammograms, at least at the time. She had a mastectomy, chemo, radiation and a recurrence 5 years after diagnosis. She was 'gone' a year later. Was it worth what she went through? If she were here, she would say "yes". It gave her more time with her family, 3 more trips to WDW, and nothing was left "unsaid". Was it tough? It sure was. Dying suddenly, unexpectedly is easier on the patient but tough on the family. Dying in a prolonged manner is tough on everyone, but there is time for "good-bye". We hoped for a cure. We didn't get it, but we got more time. For that I am grateful.

 

[Shelton123]

Eh, not necessarily - I'm both of those people. I've received chemo and lived, and I've watched a close friend wither away because there were no options left. She tried at least 5+ clinical trials. I'm all for alternative medicine if it works, but the alternative medicine in question has been proven not to work - his tumor has grown back. I think that's a fair way to say "Okay, what we want isn't working. We want our child to live so why don't we give chemo a chance and see if it works too".

Also, this "refuse chemo" thing seems to be coming from the mother only.

Boy can't even read. As if he knows what chemo is.

 

[imabrat]

Carley, I understand how you feel. My Mom died of breast cancer. She did everything 'right'. She was moderate in her diet, didn't drink, didn't smoke, had no bad habits; she had bad luck. She was also unlucky in that she was one of the 20% whose breast tumors do not visualize on the mammograms, at least at the time. She had a mastectomy, chemo, radiation and a recurrence 5 years after diagnosis. She was 'gone' a year later. Was it worth what she went through? If she were here, she would say "yes". It gave her more time with her family, 3 more trips to WDW, and nothing was left "unsaid". Was it tough? It sure was. Dying suddenly, unexpectedly is easier on the patient but tough on the family. Dying in a prolonged manner is tough on everyone, but there is time for "good-bye". We hoped for a cure. We didn't get it, but we got more time. For that I am grateful.

It's not that she had bad luck, it's just that she made a better angel than we would've. I would give myself to let some people who've died of this terrible disease come back, but I know that they have a purpose up in Heaven - they are better angels than I ever would've been.

Just my opinion. You and your family are so strong.


It angers me that we'll probably never get a cure, insurance companies and medical companies make way too much money off of cancer than they should.

 

[SwedishMeatball]

Mom returns voluntarily with son.

http://health.yahoo.com/news/ap/us_forced_chemo.html

 

[minniecarousel]

Mom returns voluntarily with son.

http://health.yahoo.com/news/ap/us_forced_chemo.html

Well, I hope it's not too late.

 

[Eeyores Butterfly]

Well, I hope it's not too late.

I agree.

I heard on the radio they are thinking of not charging the mom since she voluntarily returned. ******** in my opinion. I'm glad she returned, but they still need to charge her. She broke the law when she took her son like that and put his health in danger. Certainly they should lessen the charge, but she should not get off scot free.

 

[PaulaSB12]

Boy can't even read. As if he knows what chemo is.

She loves her child but won't even let him learn something that basic? That isn't love that is determination to keep him dependent on her.

 

[Darsa]

they are better angels than I ever would've been

I don't know about that, imabrat. I think you would have been some stiff competition!