Why do we need protection?

[Fergie]

http://www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/07/21/sick.teen.ap/index.html

Un-be-farking-lievable!

[OT]

Dumbass parents.

[Boatwrench]

Why do we need protection....because this is another step closer to a police state. Government officials stepping in and taking control of someones life.

From the article:
After three months of chemotherapy last year made him nauseated and weak, Abraham rejected doctors' recommendations to go through a second round when he learned early this year that his Hodgkin's disease, a cancer of the lymph nodes, was active again.


The teenager is 16, old enough to be tried as an adult in capital offenses, one year away from volunteering for the military, two years away from voting. HE (Abraham) rejected the doctor's recommendations, I am sure HE is aware of the consequences of this action, probable death.

This is much different than a parent leaving an eight & four year old to go to Vegas for the weekend

The 2nd amendment guarantees the rest.

Tom

[5-90]

Because, obviously, we aren't able to look after ourselves...

Let's see...

"Starchild?" WTF kinda name is that? Sounds like a Hallowe'en outfit...

Apparently, the kid himself wants to discontinue treatment - not his parents. So, it's not a parenting issue - because he probably had to convince THEM as well, and failed miserably with Socialist Services and the court.

How did Social Services find out that he was refusing treatment, anyhow? Did some "nanny neighbour" tell them? If it was a doctor, there's a fine ethical line invovled here. M.D.'s are required to report cases of abuse and suspected abuse - which I can (mostly) agree with. However, this is neither. Again, it seems that it was the kid himself that made the decision - not his parents. From what I've heard, chemo is nothin' nice, and I can see wanting to avoid it. Especially if it didn't work. "Necessary treatment?" If it didn't work the first time, what's to make anyone think it might the second time? "Insanity is doing the same thing the same way, while expecting a different result." Sounds nuts to me.

I agree with Boats - this isn't a case of parental dereliction or negligence - this is a personal decision made about living the rest of one's life, by someone who is probably "growed up" enough to understand the consequences of such decision. If I had to go through something that left me weak and peaked, which didn't work, and they wanted me to go through it AGAIN, I'd probably say "No" myself!

The difference? Since I'm over 18, I'm obviously big enough and old enough to look after myself for a while (for now...) Since he's not 18 yet, his wills and desires don't apply.

I don't know when 18 became a magic number, and I don't know why it applies to everything (at 18 you can enlist on your own, sign a contract on your own, vote, and damn near everything else - but you have to wait three more years to buy a drink? Don't get me started...) As in so many other cases, people grow at different rates - having a terminal disease of some sort is the sort of thing that will make you mature a little more quickly.

Of course, psychological factors don't have any bearing at all on legal matters - unless you're classified as "insane." Since "accelerated maturity" isn't recognised in DSM-IV, it's got no bearing here.


Even though it damn well should.

I hope this case gets overturned. In to-day's legal climate, where "precedents" have more bearing than "facts," this sets a very bad precendent...

5-90

[bjoehandley]

I'm with Boatwrench and 5-90 here.

[Rev Den]

Seems to me he is seeking treatment, just not the treatment that the established medical "profession" is recommending. He may very well be better off on his current treatment.


I used to joke about wheatgrass, till I tried it.

Rev

[OT]

I heard it makes you goofy...

[riverfever]

I heard it makes you goofy...

Eating a sugar free, non fat diet?

[riverfever]

I also think this is a personal choice issue. He's made a decision that he feels will benefit him. It's not like his alternative form of dealing with the cancer was to kill 10 random people. Why the involvement from big brother?

[CanMan]

We need protection, because the pullout method sometimes doesn't work.

[IXNAYXJ]

We need protection, because the pullout method sometimes doesn't work.Yeah, just ask your parents.... ;)

-----Matt-----

[reliablestv]

I wonder how much it will cost these ppl to fight this? I think its obvious they have no right to step in in the decition of theropy. now the ppl "trying" to help him are robbing him of much needed assets to help him get better.I think it should be alot easier to sue these kind of organisations.On top of all that half the problem is the local DA is leting his ego run his career.this should have never come to court. i bet the fear of a law suit would make him think twice about trying to make his mark

[Fergie]

Like I say:

You can't do away with the supid people that want to sue, and bring cases on everything. However, if you kicked every lawyer in the head, or groin several times when they thought about taking on these types of cases, there wouldnt be many lawyers that would take the cases to court anymore.

Kinda like Pavlov, y'know.

[OT]

http://www.gulmece.com/karikatur/genel/pavlov.jpg

[5-90]

Like I say:

You can't do away with the supid people that want to sue, and bring cases on everything. However, if you kicked every lawyer in the head, or groin several times when they thought about taking on these types of cases, there wouldnt be many lawyers that would take the cases to court anymore.

Kinda like Pavlov, y'know.

I'd like a little more background on the case, but my impression is that the kid doesn't want treatment, and his parents don't want to force him. He's going for something else - whether it works or not medically is immaterial - it may work psychologically, and we're still trying to figure out the effects of the mind (physiologically speaking) on healing.

For instance, I should have FAR more scarring than I do, but I've almost got the ability to "regenerate," rather than heal. I'm not willing to test that by, say, lopping off a finger - but I've broken a few bones that have healed without a trace, I've healed various cuts and scrapes without scarring, the skin grafts I've had on my right shoulder and upper chest have healed imperceptibly, and I seem to get sick only every few years.

Granted, I've got a few things I should probably get fixed - my deviated septum was aggrivated when I broke my nose (I got hit by a car in Nov, for those of you who are wondering when and how,) but you can't tell from the outside. Oddly enough, most of the fractures I sustained in that incident were considered "non-displaced," and have healed without a perceptible trace in X-Ray or MRI (I've seen both.)

Who is to say that this kid, following a course that HE wants to follow, wouldn't be able to "cure" his Hodgkin's Lymphoma using little more than a regimen HE wants to follow, and using only his mind otherwise? Even if that doesn't work, he'll probably recover quite enough health to feel like he can withstand another round of Chemo later - and if it works that time, it's still a net victory.

Another story - my grandfather, last year, was diagnosed with "Inoperable Aggressive Pancreatic Cancer." They decided it was "inoperable" when they tried to remove the tumour, and found it had metastised into nearly everything but his liver, kidneys, and heart. They gave him a month at the outside.

Three months later, we put him in the ground. Doctors hadn't seen anything like it - he actually improved with minimal Chemo before he tired out and succumbed totally. This man hadn't seen a doctor since he was born - and I think it was a midwife that delivered him. He had his first physical examination at age 70, and the doctor told him he was healthier than he (the doctor) was.

Faith healing just might work. Whether it's faith in (a) God, faith in oneself, faith in someone else, or even faith in the "white coat" - faith can give your mind an anchor to cling to, and give it the footing it needs to heal its vehicle (your body.) For me, it's a concrete and unshakeable faith in my wife and my marriage now - before, it was just faith in myself.

It must have worked - that incident in Noveber killed me (literally - for 20-30 seconds or so that they knew of!) and I kick-started myself. Call it a phenomenal constitution, call it "will to live," call it what you will - if following a course considered "alternative" can help this kid, I see no reason to disallow it. The State be damned - since when do THEY know how to raise a kid? Besides, he's damn near growed up already - perhaps the parents should, instead of appealing, see about having him declared an "emancipated minor" - which would play Hell with what Socialist Services are trying to do...

5-90

[Boatwrench]

Glad to here you're on the mend and condolences on your Grandfather.

I mean no disresepct to you or him, but I have to ask...

If a person is diagnosed with inoperable cancer and given X many days/months to live. Why put that person through the rigors of chemo?

This exactly what this young man is saying, I don't want to be ill from Chemo.

The same 'social services' that have taken this young man's ability to make a consience decision are the same type of people that will bar him from medicinal marijuana to help ease the nausea.

Tom

[WVXJ]

Its funny that what is considered "alternative" here in the U.S., is basically old news to the rest of the world. In countries where the pharmaceutical and petro-chemical industries don't run things, people seem to be a little more 'free' in certain instances. Practitioners of 'western' medicine who completely reject 'eastern' or 'alternative' forms of treatment are actually just whores of the industry. But, IMO, the entire state of VA is FOS, which is why i take my stand beyond the blue ridge mts.

[5-90]

Glad to here you're on the mend and condolences on your Grandfather.

I mean no disresepct to you or him, but I have to ask...

If a person is diagnosed with inoperable cancer and given X many days/months to live. Why put that person through the rigors of chemo?

This exactly what this young man is saying, I don't want to be ill from Chemo.

The same 'social services' that have taken this young man's ability to make a consience decision are the same type of people that will bar him from medicinal marijuana to help ease the nausea.

Tom

No disrespect picked up here, believe me.

Why put him through Chemo? Perhaps they told him that Chemo would give him that "month at the outside," and since he hadn't been to see doctors before (except for that one physical,) he probably wanted to give them a chance. He was rather like that - you didn't "automatically" f up with him - he gave you a chance to screw up before he discounted you entirely.

Kinda made me what I am to-day - I learned a great deal from that man. Not having much of a "father influence" at home, I couldn't really learn much there. Getting to spend a good deal of time with mom's parents helped make me who and waht I am to-day - I could have turned out a good deal worse.

I think if he'd been to see doctors before, he'd have been properly sceptical - which, oddly enough, seems to help when dealing with them... Don't ask me to figure that part out - I still haven't...

5-90

[jml1911a1]

Chemo sucks: I know a few people who had/have cancer, and after chemo, they're never the same. Their bodies never really recover, and they are susceptible to all sorts of diseases because their immune system is nearly destroyed. A "traditional" doctor(one who advocates surgery or chemicals to treat disease)'s idea of "success" is a few years of cancer-free recovery before the cancer comes back--and it almost always comes back after chemo.

I would much rather die from cancer than live after chemo.

A bit of research will show that the alternative treatments are much more successful (if followed as directed--no shortcuts, and without chemo) and the patient doesn't go through that awful period of time where their hair falls out and they can barely function. Most alternative treatments actually IMPROVE the overall health of the patient, instead of nearly killing them. (Imagine that!)

I can't imagine the aucacity of a judge telling these parents, and, more importantly, this young man, what to do. That wouldn't go over well, were I involved.

The doctor(s) involved with running to Mr. Nanny State should have their names posted all over the 'net, and they should be avoided like the plague and ridiculed like a fat woman in a tutu: Any doctor who runs and tells Big Brother when a patient doesn't want a prescribed treatment should be shunned.

As an aside: Is anyone else being asked about seat belts and guns when they go for a doctor's visit? Last time I was at a doctor's office, I was asked some rather nosy questions about seat belt use, helmets, and firearms that I regret answering politely.

[5-90]

Nope - my doctor doesn't ask me things like that. It's part of why I like him.

Besides, he knows my attitude on firearms, explosives, pyrotechnics, and other ordnance; he's NEVER seen me without a knife of some sort (usually at least two,) and he's also aware that these things have NOTHING to do with my health. Before I went to see this doctor (years ago...) the one I'd gone to before had the temerity to ask me if I owned firearms, and I told him simply, "None of your damned business."

"Shall I take that as a 'Yes?'"
"No, that simply means that I don't have to answer that question, and I don't intend to. Either way. I'm here to see you for health reasons - and that has nothing to do with my health. Ask me again, and I'm going to find another doctor."

I'd gone to see him twice, and I no longer recall his name (but I knew enough other firearms enthusiasts - quite a few going to see him - that he's either moved or gone out of private practise due to lost clientele.)

As far as Chemo? Generally speaking, "Chemotherapy" is, simply put, a batch of selected poisons introduced into the body under medical supervision. The hope is that they will kill the cancer cells/tumour before they kill the patient, and that the patient can then recover from the poisoning he just had. Long-term Chemo is practically a guaranteed death sentence.

As I mentioned before - even if he should decide to go try Chemo again, the fact of following a healthy "alternative" regimen would probably make him more likely to survive Chemo the second time around, and more able to bear it, and that means that the Chemo might actually have the "intended" result.

Either way, I've got issues with the fact that he is now being forced to accept treatment - specifically because he's a minor (just barely.) Not because he's mentally incompetent or anything like that - but because he's not yet 18, and he sees no reason to go through something that didn't work the first time, and wants to try something else. I see no harm to come of that.

5-90

[Ronbo]

(snip)Chemo sucks: I know a few people who had/have cancer, and after chemo, they're never the same. Their bodies never really recover, and they are susceptible to all sorts of diseases because their immune system is nearly destroyed.

I would much rather die from cancer than live after chemo.

A bit of research will show that the alternative treatments are much more successful.


"Lance (Armstrong) received one round of BEP (Bleomycin, Etoposide and Platinol) chemotherapy, followed by three rounds of VIP chemotherapy (Ifosfamide, Etoposide and Platinol.)"
"The diagnosis was testicular cancer. / Going untreated, the cancer had spread to Lance's abdomen, lungs and brain."


Now there's a guy NOT living life to the fullest after chemotherapy. :wave1: