TOTALLY GEEKED!

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

RE: Should A 17-Year-Old Be Allowed To Choose Death?

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

flan327 wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
They tied her down to a bed, sedated her, and forced something in her body she didn't want.

This is no different than rape.
Except for the fact that they are trying to save her life.
flan

That is not their decision to make.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Lawyerlady wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
First to call chemo "poison", well EVERY medication has a little "poison" in it if you take too much of it. And, the survival rate is very high. So, yes, like everything in life there will be temporary pain and discomfort. Unfortunately, there are times in life you endure suffering to get to a better place. I am a bit bewildered about a mother who would not want a 93% chance of success for her daughter to live. I think mom may just be in denial and looking at her daughter thinking, oh she LOOKS healthy because many cancer patients look like they are in their normal state of health for a long time while the cancer ravages them internally and then in short order it's a steep decline. I wonder what the father's position is a well?
She was diagnosed in SEPTEMBER, and wanted to get a second opinion. The State stepped in immediately and took over by October without allowing her to seek another medical opinion. That's big brother at its finest.

I do agree that her mom who is her legal guardian is the one in the primary position to make medical decisions for her.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
They tied her down to a bed, sedated her, and forced something in her body she didn't want.

This is no different than rape.
Are we going to compare everything to "rape" nowadays? Sooo, when you take your 5 yr old into the hospital to get their tonsils out and they don't want to go, is that rape too?

First - ridiculous comparison. They are taking something bad out - not putting a PORT in your body and filling it with poison. Two - a five year old wouldn't get their tonsils out without parental consent.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Lawyerlady wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
They tied her down to a bed, sedated her, and forced something in her body she didn't want.

This is no different than rape.
Are we going to compare everything to "rape" nowadays? Sooo, when you take your 5 yr old into the hospital to get their tonsils out and they don't want to go, is that rape too?
First - ridiculous comparison. They are taking something bad out - not putting a PORT in your body and filling it with poison. Two - a five year old wouldn't get their tonsils out without parental consent.

Chemo is NOT rape.

flan

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Reasonable medical professionals disagree on using chemotherapy as a treatment for cancer. That being the case, people should be able to choose.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

flan327 wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
They tied her down to a bed, sedated her, and forced something in her body she didn't want.

This is no different than rape.
Are we going to compare everything to "rape" nowadays? Sooo, when you take your 5 yr old into the hospital to get their tonsils out and they don't want to go, is that rape too?
First - ridiculous comparison. They are taking something bad out - not putting a PORT in your body and filling it with poison. Two - a five year old wouldn't get their tonsils out without parental consent.
Chemo is NOT rape.
flan

Tying someone down to the bed and forcing a foreign object in their body IS rape. Do you know what a port is?

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Lawyerlady wrote:
flan327 wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
They tied her down to a bed, sedated her, and forced something in her body she didn't want.

This is no different than rape.
Are we going to compare everything to "rape" nowadays? Sooo, when you take your 5 yr old into the hospital to get their tonsils out and they don't want to go, is that rape too?
First - ridiculous comparison. They are taking something bad out - not putting a PORT in your body and filling it with poison. Two - a five year old wouldn't get their tonsils out without parental consent.
Chemo is NOT rape.
flan
Tying someone down to the bed and forcing a foreign object in their body IS rape. Do you know what a port is?

I'm not stupid.

Frankly, comparing chemo to rape is a slap in the face to anyone who has been raped.

flan

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

I know what a port is. And, trying to equate all this to rape is pretty low and part of the reason why women like to practice victimization of each other. Wow.

ed11563 · Guru

Spouse thinks she should be allowed to die on her own terms, because chemo is horrible.

I've seen how horrible death from cancer is.

My sister had chemo, yes, it was horrible, but mostly because it failed.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Now, having said that , I am not necessarily of the mind that the State should usurp the parents either.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

ed11563 wrote:
Spouse thinks she should be allowed to die on her own terms, because chemo is horrible.
I've seen how horrible death from cancer is.
My sister had chemo, yes, it was horrible, but mostly because it failed.

Yes, sometimes it will fail. Sometimes it's purely a last ditch effort. But, there are many different kinds of cancer and you can't compare Uncle Joe's stage 4 pancreatic and lung cancer to a Hodgkin's lymphoma diagnosed in a female teen. The outcomes and prognosis are markedly different.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
ed11563 wrote:
Spouse thinks she should be allowed to die on her own terms, because chemo is horrible.
I've seen how horrible death from cancer is.
My sister had chemo, yes, it was horrible, but mostly because it failed.
Yes, sometimes it will fail. Sometimes it's purely a last ditch effort. But, there are many different kinds of cancer and you can't compare Uncle Joe's stage 4 pancreatic and lung cancer to a Hodgkin's lymphoma diagnosed in a female teen. The outcomes and prognosis are markedly different.

That's what I've been saying.

flan

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

BTW, Mario Lemieux of the Pittsburgh Penguins battled that and he is thriving and doing well. A better approach might have been for the hospital to contact survivors of the illness to meet with her and the parents and really discuss it from an emotional patient perspective rather than trying to strong arm via the iron govt fist.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

flan327 wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
flan327 wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
They tied her down to a bed, sedated her, and forced something in her body she didn't want.

This is no different than rape.
Are we going to compare everything to "rape" nowadays? Sooo, when you take your 5 yr old into the hospital to get their tonsils out and they don't want to go, is that rape too?
First - ridiculous comparison. They are taking something bad out - not putting a PORT in your body and filling it with poison. Two - a five year old wouldn't get their tonsils out without parental consent.
Chemo is NOT rape.
flan
Tying someone down to the bed and forcing a foreign object in their body IS rape. Do you know what a port is?
I'm not stupid.
Frankly, comparing chemo to rape is a slap in the face to anyone who has been raped.
flan

In Massachusetts - the definition of rape is the penetration of any orifice with any object without the consent of the victim.
It fits perfectly.

Furthermore, you think any rape victim would not sympathize with a 17 year old girl being forcibly tied to a bed, sedated and having her body violated against her will? And having no one to turn to for help because the authorities are on the side of the perpetrators?

-- Edited by Lawyerlady on Saturday 10th of January 2015 08:39:16 AM

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

ed11563 wrote:
Spouse thinks she should be allowed to die on her own terms, because chemo is horrible.
I've seen how horrible death from cancer is.
My sister had chemo, yes, it was horrible, but mostly because it failed.

As it can. And even when it succeeds, the long term side effects can be tragic.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

I don't understand how we can be having a discussion on the rights of parents to refuse medical care and you playing the "Rape Card" aka Lena Dunham!

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

The only reason to put in a port is BECAUSE you are going to get chemotherapy. Otherwise if you refuse it, you aren't going to get a port put in.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

The crux of the matter is when does the State have the right to trump the decisions of parents on what is best for their children? Obviously, the state does in cases of child abuse. But, medical care is a much stickier issue. And, in general I would rather see more err on the side of parents than the State.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
The only reason to put in a port is BECAUSE you are going to get chemotherapy. Otherwise if you refuse it, you aren't going to get a port put in.

So?

Massachusetts law -

Sexual assault and rape are crimes of violence and control, using sex acts as a weapon. Rape and sexual assault are not sexually motivated acts; rather, they stem from aggression, rage, sexism, and the determination to exercise power over someone else. Rape is also a legal term that is defined in Massachusetts by three elements: penetration of any orifice by any object; force or threat of force; against the will of the victim. Sexual assault is often more broadly defined as any sexual activity that is forced or coerced or unwanted.

Notice how sexual assault and rape are separate? Please tell me how what they did does not meet the bolded?

Southern_Belle · Nothing's Impossible

So now that she's a ward of the state they will have to pay all medical costs.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Lawyerlady wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
The only reason to put in a port is BECAUSE you are going to get chemotherapy. Otherwise if you refuse it, you aren't going to get a port put in.
So?

Massachusetts law -

Sexual assault and rape are crimes of violence and control, using sex acts as a weapon. Rape and sexual assault are not sexually motivated acts; rather, they stem from aggression, rage, sexism, and the determination to exercise power over someone else. Rape is also a legal term that is defined in Massachusetts by three elements: penetration of any orifice by any object; force or threat of force; against the will of the victim. Sexual assault is often more broadly defined as any sexual activity that is forced or coerced or unwanted.

Notice how sexual assault and rape are separate? Please tell me how what they did does not meet the bolded?

It's Connecticut.

Are you channeling husker today?

flan

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Lawyerlady wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
The only reason to put in a port is BECAUSE you are going to get chemotherapy. Otherwise if you refuse it, you aren't going to get a port put in.
So?

Massachusetts law -

Sexual assault and rape are crimes of violence and control, using sex acts as a weapon. Rape and sexual assault are not sexually motivated acts; rather, they stem from aggression, rage, sexism, and the determination to exercise power over someone else. Rape is also a legal term that is defined in Massachusetts by three elements: penetration of any orifice by any object; force or threat of force; against the will of the victim. Sexual assault is often more broadly defined as any sexual activity that is forced or coerced or unwanted.

Notice how sexual assault and rape are separate? Please tell me how what they did does not meet the bolded?

Are you immersing yourself in the HuffPo and MSNBC? You sound just like a flaming left wing liberal! biggrin Everything is RAPE!!!

Mellow Momma · Sniff...sniff, sniff. Yay! A Bum!

While I am unsure how I feel about the OP (her outcome is likely outstanding with treatment, and a death sentence without)...

I can say without reservation that inserting a port in order to efficiently get lifesaving treatment (harsh chemical treatment) into her is NOT the same or even comparable to forcing anything into her genitals for the purpose of sexual gratification of another person who enjoys the power trip.

The fact that you think it's the same thing saddens me on one hand, and makes me happy because it's obvious you have no experience as a victim of sexual violence firsthand or with anyone in your immediate family.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Mellow Momma wrote:
While I am unsure how I feel about the OP (her outcome is likely outstanding with treatment, and a death sentence without)...

I can say without reservation that inserting a port in order to efficiently get lifesaving treatment (harsh chemical treatment) into her is NOT the same or even comparable to forcing anything into her genitals for the purpose of sexual gratification of another person who enjoys the power trip.

The fact that you think it's the same thing saddens me on one hand, and makes me happy because it's obvious you have no experience as a victim of sexual violence firsthand or with anyone in your immediate family.

Well, why do we even have to go there? We are talking about parental rights basically.

Southern_Belle · Nothing's Impossible

I keep saying it's battery. If a surgeon does surgery with no signed consent they can be sued for battery. Even if the patient agreed but didn't sign. The state signed for the minor, that's how the hospital was able to put the port in. As wrong as it is. I bet the staff was not happy about doing it but if they refuse they can be fired for patient abandonment.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Mellow Momma wrote:
While I am unsure how I feel about the OP (her outcome is likely outstanding with treatment, and a death sentence without)...

I can say without reservation that inserting a port in order to efficiently get lifesaving treatment (harsh chemical treatment) into her is NOT the same or even comparable to forcing anything into her genitals for the purpose of sexual gratification of another person who enjoys the power trip.

The fact that you think it's the same thing saddens me on one hand, and makes me happy because it's obvious you have no experience as a victim of sexual violence firsthand or with anyone in your immediate family.
Well, why do we even have to go there? We are talking about parental rights basically.

We are also talking about the forced assault against a girl. No one cares that this girl was assaulted? Dragged from her home, tied to a bed, drugged, and then forcibly had foreign objects and poison put inside her? How absolutely horrifying. And what's worse - it's the state that allowed this to happen, the ones that are supposed to protect her rights.

And Mellow Momma - I will tell you that your assumptions are misplaced. Any violation of a woman's body in this manner is horrifying, and I'm quite surprised that any woman who has experienced such a violation would not understand the terror this young woman has gone through. She was tied down and VIOLATED against her will.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Southern_Belle wrote:
I keep saying it's battery. If a surgeon does surgery with no signed consent they can be sued for battery. Even if the patient agreed but didn't sign. The state signed for the minor, that's how the hospital was able to put the port in. As wrong as it is. I bet the staff was not happy about doing it but if they refuse they can be fired for patient abandonment.

To say the least.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
The only reason to put in a port is BECAUSE you are going to get chemotherapy. Otherwise if you refuse it, you aren't going to get a port put in.
So?

Massachusetts law -

Sexual assault and rape are crimes of violence and control, using sex acts as a weapon. Rape and sexual assault are not sexually motivated acts; rather, they stem from aggression, rage, sexism, and the determination to exercise power over someone else. Rape is also a legal term that is defined in Massachusetts by three elements: penetration of any orifice by any object; force or threat of force; against the will of the victim. Sexual assault is often more broadly defined as any sexual activity that is forced or coerced or unwanted.

Notice how sexual assault and rape are separate? Please tell me how what they did does not meet the bolded?
Are you immersing yourself in the HuffPo and MSNBC? You sound just like a flaming left wing liberal! Everything is RAPE!!!

Not everything. But this was an assault on this young woman's body without her consent. They cut into it, they inserted foreign objects, all while she was drugged and tied down.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

When you put it like that, sounds very Bill Cosby.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Could she have been made an Emancipated minor and then refused LL?

Southern_Belle · Nothing's Impossible

Restraints are majorly frowned upon. I wonder what JACHO would say about this. The hospital could lose its accreditation over something like this.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Mellow Momma wrote:
While I am unsure how I feel about the OP (her outcome is likely outstanding with treatment, and a death sentence without)...

I can say without reservation that inserting a port in order to efficiently get lifesaving treatment (harsh chemical treatment) into her is NOT the same or even comparable to forcing anything into her genitals for the purpose of sexual gratification of another person who enjoys the power trip.

The fact that you think it's the same thing saddens me on one hand, and makes me happy because it's obvious you have no experience as a victim of sexual violence firsthand or with anyone in your immediate family.

I love you so much right now.

flan

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Could she have been made an Emancipated minor and then refused LL?

There was no time. The state took over so fast, she didn't even have time for a second opinion. Not to mention, that would have to go through the Court, which hasn't been too good on this one.

She could have done a couple of things, but she would have had to do them quickly. One, move out of state before any court order came through - preferably near a good cancer treatment center, which ups the argument that she's making sound medical choices. Two, she could have gotten pregnant - that would have thrown quite a wrench in to the state's case for forced chemo and bought time while hashing out the pregnancy issue.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Lawyerlady wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
The only reason to put in a port is BECAUSE you are going to get chemotherapy. Otherwise if you refuse it, you aren't going to get a port put in.
So?

Massachusetts law -

Sexual assault and rape are crimes of violence and control, using sex acts as a weapon. Rape and sexual assault are not sexually motivated acts; rather, they stem from aggression, rage, sexism, and the determination to exercise power over someone else. Rape is also a legal term that is defined in Massachusetts by three elements: penetration of any orifice by any object; force or threat of force; against the will of the victim. Sexual assault is often more broadly defined as any sexual activity that is forced or coerced or unwanted.

Notice how sexual assault and rape are separate? Please tell me how what they did does not meet the bolded?
Are you immersing yourself in the HuffPo and MSNBC? You sound just like a flaming left wing liberal! Everything is RAPE!!!
Not everything. But this was an assault on this young woman's body without her consent. They cut into it, they inserted foreign objects, all while she was drugged and tied down.

Do you have an update on this? I don't see all that info in the OP.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Southern_Belle wrote:
Restraints are majorly frowned upon. I wonder what JACHO would say about this. The hospital could lose its accreditation over something like this.

One can hope.

Mellow Momma · Sniff...sniff, sniff. Yay! A Bum!

Lawyerlady wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Mellow Momma wrote:
While I am unsure how I feel about the OP (her outcome is likely outstanding with treatment, and a death sentence without)...

I can say without reservation that inserting a port in order to efficiently get lifesaving treatment (harsh chemical treatment) into her is NOT the same or even comparable to forcing anything into her genitals for the purpose of sexual gratification of another person who enjoys the power trip.

The fact that you think it's the same thing saddens me on one hand, and makes me happy because it's obvious you have no experience as a victim of sexual violence firsthand or with anyone in your immediate family.
Well, why do we even have to go there? We are talking about parental rights basically.
We are also talking about the forced assault against a girl. No one cares that this girl was assaulted? Dragged from her home, tied to a bed, drugged, and then forcibly had foreign objects and poison put inside her? How absolutely horrifying. And what's worse - it's the state that allowed this to happen, the ones that are supposed to protect her rights.

And Mellow Momma - I will tell you that your assumptions are misplaced. Any violation of a woman's body in this manner is horrifying, and I'm quite surprised that any woman who has experienced such a violation would not understand the terror this young woman has gone through. She was tied down and VIOLATED against her will.

I agree that it is assault. It is battery. It is NOT rape. The terms are not interchangeable.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
The only reason to put in a port is BECAUSE you are going to get chemotherapy. Otherwise if you refuse it, you aren't going to get a port put in.
So?

Massachusetts law -

Sexual assault and rape are crimes of violence and control, using sex acts as a weapon. Rape and sexual assault are not sexually motivated acts; rather, they stem from aggression, rage, sexism, and the determination to exercise power over someone else. Rape is also a legal term that is defined in Massachusetts by three elements: penetration of any orifice by any object; force or threat of force; against the will of the victim. Sexual assault is often more broadly defined as any sexual activity that is forced or coerced or unwanted.

Notice how sexual assault and rape are separate? Please tell me how what they did does not meet the bolded?
Are you immersing yourself in the HuffPo and MSNBC? You sound just like a flaming left wing liberal! Everything is RAPE!!!
Not everything. But this was an assault on this young woman's body without her consent. They cut into it, they inserted foreign objects, all while she was drugged and tied down.
Do you have an update on this? I don't see all that info in the OP.

Yes, I posted the more detailed article. Go back to the last page.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Ok, thanks.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Gaga - an excerpt

About a week after running away, Cassandra came home. In her essay, she wrote that she had returned because she was afraid her disappearance might land her mother in jail. In December, she was hospitalized.

“I was strapped to a bed by my wrists and ankles and sedated,” she wrote in the essay, which was accompanied by a photo of her in the hospital. “I woke up in the recovery room with a port surgically placed in my chest. I was outraged and felt completely violated.”

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Mellow Momma wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Mellow Momma wrote:
While I am unsure how I feel about the OP (her outcome is likely outstanding with treatment, and a death sentence without)...

I can say without reservation that inserting a port in order to efficiently get lifesaving treatment (harsh chemical treatment) into her is NOT the same or even comparable to forcing anything into her genitals for the purpose of sexual gratification of another person who enjoys the power trip.

The fact that you think it's the same thing saddens me on one hand, and makes me happy because it's obvious you have no experience as a victim of sexual violence firsthand or with anyone in your immediate family.
Well, why do we even have to go there? We are talking about parental rights basically.
We are also talking about the forced assault against a girl. No one cares that this girl was assaulted? Dragged from her home, tied to a bed, drugged, and then forcibly had foreign objects and poison put inside her? How absolutely horrifying. And what's worse - it's the state that allowed this to happen, the ones that are supposed to protect her rights.

And Mellow Momma - I will tell you that your assumptions are misplaced. Any violation of a woman's body in this manner is horrifying, and I'm quite surprised that any woman who has experienced such a violation would not understand the terror this young woman has gone through. She was tied down and VIOLATED against her will.
I agree that it is assault. It is battery. It is NOT rape. The terms are not interchangeable.

I did not use the term sexual assault. I used the term rape - which has multiple definitions. And this fits.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

OK. I found it. And, yes, I have said repeatedly that the State should not trump parental rights.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

I have never heard of a rapist trying to save someone's life.

flan

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

flan327 wrote:
I have never heard of a rapist trying to save someone's life.

flan

Good grief. You are stuck on the most common vernacular of the word rape, with a picture of some hooded guy holding down a woman and ripping her clothes off.

And it doesn't matter their intent - people have rights. You don't get to choose for them.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Now here's some real questions - what if it doesn't work? What if she dies anyway? What if an alternative treatment may have worked?

These people are playing God - it's not their place. It's her decision and her parent's. If she dies - what does it mean to them? If she lives - what does it mean to them? They have no personal stake in this.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Lawyerlady wrote:
Now here's some real questions - what if it doesn't work? What if she dies anyway? What if an alternative treatment may have worked?

These people are playing God - it's not their place. It's her decision and her parent's. If she dies - what does it mean to them? If she lives - what does it mean to them? They have no personal stake in this.

Other than that pesky Hippocratic oath...

flan

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Lawyerlady wrote:
flan327 wrote:
I have never heard of a rapist trying to save someone's life.

flan
Good grief. You are stuck on the most common vernacular of the word rape, with a picture of some hooded guy holding down a woman and ripping her clothes off.

And it doesn't matter their intent - people have rights. You don't get to choose for them.

You're the one who brought it up. And it is NOT an accurate analogy.

flan

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Break it down. What was your opinion on the Amish girl who was being forced?

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

flan327 wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
flan327 wrote:
I have never heard of a rapist trying to save someone's life.

flan
Good grief. You are stuck on the most common vernacular of the word rape, with a picture of some hooded guy holding down a woman and ripping her clothes off.

And it doesn't matter their intent - people have rights. You don't get to choose for them.
You're the one who brought it up. And it is NOT an accurate analogy.
flan

Yes, I don't think taking that to the "rape" comparison helps the discussion. But, I do agree with you that her Mother has the right as her legal guardian to make those decisions for her child. And, that really should have been the end of it.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

flan327 wrote:
Lawyerlady wrote:
Now here's some real questions - what if it doesn't work? What if she dies anyway? What if an alternative treatment may have worked?

These people are playing God - it's not their place. It's her decision and her parent's. If she dies - what does it mean to them? If she lives - what does it mean to them? They have no personal stake in this.
Other than that pesky Hippocratic oath...
flan

You mean this one -

This is the original version of the Hippocratic Oath:

I swear by Apollo the physician, and Aesculapius the surgeon, likewise Hygeia and Panacea, and call all the gods and goddesses to witness, that I will observe and keep this underwritten oath, to the utmost of my power and judgment.
I will reverence my master who taught me the art. Equally with my parents, will I allow him things necessary for his support, and will consider his sons as brothers. I will teach them my art without reward or agreement; and I will impart all my acquirement, instructions, and whatever I know, to my master's children, as to my own; and likewise to all my pupils, who shall bind and tie themselves by a professional oath, but to none else.
With regard to healing the sick, I will devise and order for them the best diet, according to my judgment and means; and I will take care that they suffer no hurt or damage.
Nor shall any man's entreaty prevail upon me to administer poison to anyone; neither will I counsel any man to do so. Moreover, I will get no sort of medicine to any pregnant woman, with a view to destroy the child.
Further, I will comport myself and use my knowledge in a godly manner.
I will not cut for the stone, but will commit that affair entirely to the surgeons.
Whatsoever house I may enter, my visit shall be for the convenience and advantage of the patient; and I will willingly refrain from doing any injury or wrong from falsehood, and (in an especial manner) from acts of an amorous nature, whatever may be the rank of those who it may be my duty to cure, whether mistress or servant, bond or free.
Whatever, in the course of my practice, I may see or hear (even when not invited), whatever I may happen to obtain knowledge of, if it be not proper to repeat it, I will keep sacred and secret within my own breast.
If I faithfully observe this oath, may I thrive and prosper in my fortune and profession, and live in the estimation of posterity; or on breach thereof, may the reverse be my fate!^[4]

Or this one -

A Modern Version of the Hippocratic Oath
I swear to fulfill, to the best of my ability and judgment, this covenant:
I will respect the hard-won scientific gains of those physicians in whose steps I walk, and gladly share such knowledge as is mine with those who are to follow.
I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures which are required, avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism.
I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon's knife or the chemist's drug.
I will not be ashamed to say "I know not," nor will I fail to call in my colleagues when the skills of another are needed for a patient's recovery.
I will respect the privacy of my patients, for their problems are not disclosed to me that the world may know. Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humbleness and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must not play at God.
I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person's family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick.
I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to cure.
I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm.
If I do not violate this oath, may I enjoy life and art, respected while I live and remembered with affection thereafter. May I always act so as to preserve the finest traditions of my calling and may I long experience the joy of healing those who seek my help.