ed11563 wrote:

---

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

Yep, and in 6 months when or if it comes back, then what?

---

Then she can go hide somewhere and die miserably in peace.

Or maybe she will go on to live a full life. At lest now she has a chance.

 

---

 Her treatments put her through a hell she chose not to go through.  Perhaps her mind thought has changed.  But if not, it was wasted and put her through pain she didn't want.

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

ed11563 wrote:

---

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

Yep, and in 6 months when or if it comes back, then what?

---

Then she can go hide somewhere and die miserably in peace.

Or maybe she will go on to live a full life. At lest now she has a chance.

 

---

 Her treatments put her through a hell she chose not to go through.  Perhaps her mind thought has changed.  But if not, it was wasted and put her through pain she didn't want.

---

 Not exactly a hell...by her words it wasn't as hard as she thought it was going to be and she wouldn't have fought so hard against it had she known. 

huskerbb wrote:

---

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

ed11563 wrote:

---

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

Yep, and in 6 months when or if it comes back, then what?

---

Then she can go hide somewhere and die miserably in peace.

Or maybe she will go on to live a full life. At lest now she has a chance.

 

---

 Her treatments put her through a hell she chose not to go through.  Perhaps her mind thought has changed.  But if not, it was wasted and put her through pain she didn't want.

---

No, they didn't.  Read the article. She even says they weren't as bad as she thought they'd be and that she might not have fought it so hard if she had known.

Basically, those who wanted her to get treatments were right--and those who didn't were full of crap 

---

 So you'd be ok if they forced YOU to take some kind of treatment you were against? Yes the treatments might be what saved her, or maybe an alternative she was willing to try would have. The government has no right to tell me what kind of medical treatment I can and cannot choose. If the government said tomorrow that all men must be circumcised or all women must have double mastectomies because it will lessen the likelihood of cancer you'd get right on board with that...lol

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

It isn't about whether it worked - it is about freedom of choice.

---

 Yep.

---

Government has intervened in cases involving certain religious denominations.

I do not believe a parent has the right to sentence their child to death because of misguided beliefs.

flan 

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

It isn't about whether it worked - it is about freedom of choice.

---

Which children do not have.   

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

It isn't about whether it worked - it is about freedom of choice.

---

Which children do not have.   

---

 Parents do.  And this girl is 17, not 7.  She has other legal choices available to her, like which parent she would live with in a custody fight and abortion - so this was just ridiculous.

ed11563 wrote:

---

Tinydancer wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Tinydancer wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

ed11563 wrote:

---

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

Yep, and in 6 months when or if it comes back, then what?

---

Then she can go hide somewhere and die miserably in peace.

Or maybe she will go on to live a full life. At lest now she has a chance.

 

---

 Her treatments put her through a hell she chose not to go through.  Perhaps her mind thought has changed.  But if not, it was wasted and put her through pain she didn't want.

---

No, they didn't.  Read the article. She even says they weren't as bad as she thought they'd be and that she might not have fought it so hard if she had known.

Basically, those who wanted her to get treatments were right--and those who didn't were full of crap 

---

 So you'd be ok if they forced YOU to take some kind of treatment you were against? Yes the treatments might be what saved her, or maybe an alternative she was willing to try would have. The government has no right to tell me what kind of medical treatment I can and cannot choose. If the government said tomorrow that all men must be circumcised or all women must have double mastectomies because it will lessen the likelihood of cancer you'd get right on board with that...lol

---

But you and I, are adults--she was not, is not.  We don't let children make their own medical decisions--and this is the very reason why.  They can't appreciate the consequences of their decisions.  Clearly, knowing what she knows now, she would have chosen differently in the first place.  

---

 Except her mother agreed with her. So parents should be forced by the government to do what she feels is wrong. They we're not even allowed to look at alternative treatments. So much for you spouting about government interference and how you're so against it.

-- Edited by Tinydancer on Tuesday 10th of March 2015 08:38:11 AM

---

Jehovah's Witnesses have been denied the "right" to choose to treat their seriously ill children with prayer, instead of medicine. 

Unfortunately, prayer doesn't work very well when a kid has a burst appendix. Or whooping cough.

So, there is precedent for overriding the parent's choice.

---

 They weren't ALLOWED to try alternative treatments. JW's can pray all they want but then they have to get treatment if it doesn't work. I can't believe anyone thinks the government belongs in your health care business. What's next, they'll tell you what you can eat and drink? Oh yeah they're already doing that...lol

Tinydancer wrote:

---

flan327 wrote:

---

Tinydancer wrote:

---

ed11563 wrote:

---

Tinydancer wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Tinydancer wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

ed11563 wrote:

---

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

Yep, and in 6 months when or if it comes back, then what?

---

Then she can go hide somewhere and die miserably in peace.

Or maybe she will go on to live a full life. At lest now she has a chance.

 

---

 Her treatments put her through a hell she chose not to go through.  Perhaps her mind thought has changed.  But if not, it was wasted and put her through pain she didn't want.

---

No, they didn't.  Read the article. She even says they weren't as bad as she thought they'd be and that she might not have fought it so hard if she had known.

Basically, those who wanted her to get treatments were right--and those who didn't were full of crap 

---

 So you'd be ok if they forced YOU to take some kind of treatment you were against? Yes the treatments might be what saved her, or maybe an alternative she was willing to try would have. The government has no right to tell me what kind of medical treatment I can and cannot choose. If the government said tomorrow that all men must be circumcised or all women must have double mastectomies because it will lessen the likelihood of cancer you'd get right on board with that...lol

---

But you and I, are adults--she was not, is not.  We don't let children make their own medical decisions--and this is the very reason why.  They can't appreciate the consequences of their decisions.  Clearly, knowing what she knows now, she would have chosen differently in the first place.  

---

 Except her mother agreed with her. So parents should be forced by the government to do what she feels is wrong. They we're not even allowed to look at alternative treatments. So much for you spouting about government interference and how you're so against it.

-- Edited by Tinydancer on Tuesday 10th of March 2015 08:38:11 AM

---

Jehovah's Witnesses have been denied the "right" to choose to treat their seriously ill children with prayer, instead of medicine. 

Unfortunately, prayer doesn't work very well when a kid has a burst appendix. Or whooping cough.

So, there is precedent for overriding the parent's choice.

---

 They weren't ALLOWED to try alternative treatments. JW's can pray all they want but then they have to get treatment if it doesn't work. I can't believe anyone thinks the government belongs in your health care business. What's next, they'll tell you what you can eat and drink? Oh yeah they're already doing that...lol

---

This is a MINOR child. Yes, she is 17, but there has to be a cut-off somewhere.

flan 

---

 Her mother is not a minor and she also wanted to try the alternatives first. Sheesh do you want the government to run every aspect of your life?

---

 Oh, goody...here come the melodramatic statements.

flan

flan327 wrote:

Spoiler

---

Tinydancer wrote:

---

flan327 wrote:

---

Tinydancer wrote:

---

ed11563 wrote:

---

Tinydancer wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Tinydancer wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

ed11563 wrote:

---

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

Yep, and in 6 months when or if it comes back, then what?

---

Then she can go hide somewhere and die miserably in peace.

Or maybe she will go on to live a full life. At lest now she has a chance.

 

---

 Her treatments put her through a hell she chose not to go through.  Perhaps her mind thought has changed.  But if not, it was wasted and put her through pain she didn't want.

---

No, they didn't.  Read the article. She even says they weren't as bad as she thought they'd be and that she might not have fought it so hard if she had known.

Basically, those who wanted her to get treatments were right--and those who didn't were full of crap 

---

 So you'd be ok if they forced YOU to take some kind of treatment you were against? Yes the treatments might be what saved her, or maybe an alternative she was willing to try would have. The government has no right to tell me what kind of medical treatment I can and cannot choose. If the government said tomorrow that all men must be circumcised or all women must have double mastectomies because it will lessen the likelihood of cancer you'd get right on board with that...lol

---

But you and I, are adults--she was not, is not.  We don't let children make their own medical decisions--and this is the very reason why.  They can't appreciate the consequences of their decisions.  Clearly, knowing what she knows now, she would have chosen differently in the first place.  

---

 Except her mother agreed with her. So parents should be forced by the government to do what she feels is wrong. They we're not even allowed to look at alternative treatments. So much for you spouting about government interference and how you're so against it.

-- Edited by Tinydancer on Tuesday 10th of March 2015 08:38:11 AM

---

Jehovah's Witnesses have been denied the "right" to choose to treat their seriously ill children with prayer, instead of medicine. 

Unfortunately, prayer doesn't work very well when a kid has a burst appendix. Or whooping cough.

So, there is precedent for overriding the parent's choice.

---

 They weren't ALLOWED to try alternative treatments. JW's can pray all they want but then they have to get treatment if it doesn't work. I can't believe anyone thinks the government belongs in your health care business. What's next, they'll tell you what you can eat and drink? Oh yeah they're already doing that...lol

---

This is a MINOR child. Yes, she is 17, but there has to be a cut-off somewhere.

flan 

---

 Her mother is not a minor and she also wanted to try the alternatives first. Sheesh do you want the government to run every aspect of your life?

---

 Oh, goody...here come the melodramatic statements.

flan

---

 Haha...you must be joking right? Coming from you this is highly amusing.

Tinydancer wrote:

---

flan327 wrote:

Spoiler

---

Tinydancer wrote:

---

flan327 wrote:

---

Tinydancer wrote:

---

ed11563 wrote:

---

Tinydancer wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Tinydancer wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

ed11563 wrote:

---

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

Yep, and in 6 months when or if it comes back, then what?

---

Then she can go hide somewhere and die miserably in peace.

Or maybe she will go on to live a full life. At lest now she has a chance.

 

---

 Her treatments put her through a hell she chose not to go through.  Perhaps her mind thought has changed.  But if not, it was wasted and put her through pain she didn't want.

---

No, they didn't.  Read the article. She even says they weren't as bad as she thought they'd be and that she might not have fought it so hard if she had known.

Basically, those who wanted her to get treatments were right--and those who didn't were full of crap 

---

 So you'd be ok if they forced YOU to take some kind of treatment you were against? Yes the treatments might be what saved her, or maybe an alternative she was willing to try would have. The government has no right to tell me what kind of medical treatment I can and cannot choose. If the government said tomorrow that all men must be circumcised or all women must have double mastectomies because it will lessen the likelihood of cancer you'd get right on board with that...lol

---

But you and I, are adults--she was not, is not.  We don't let children make their own medical decisions--and this is the very reason why.  They can't appreciate the consequences of their decisions.  Clearly, knowing what she knows now, she would have chosen differently in the first place.  

---

 Except her mother agreed with her. So parents should be forced by the government to do what she feels is wrong. They we're not even allowed to look at alternative treatments. So much for you spouting about government interference and how you're so against it.

-- Edited by Tinydancer on Tuesday 10th of March 2015 08:38:11 AM

---

Jehovah's Witnesses have been denied the "right" to choose to treat their seriously ill children with prayer, instead of medicine. 

Unfortunately, prayer doesn't work very well when a kid has a burst appendix. Or whooping cough.

So, there is precedent for overriding the parent's choice.

---

 They weren't ALLOWED to try alternative treatments. JW's can pray all they want but then they have to get treatment if it doesn't work. I can't believe anyone thinks the government belongs in your health care business. What's next, they'll tell you what you can eat and drink? Oh yeah they're already doing that...lol

---

This is a MINOR child. Yes, she is 17, but there has to be a cut-off somewhere.

flan 

---

 Her mother is not a minor and she also wanted to try the alternatives first. Sheesh do you want the government to run every aspect of your life?

---

 Oh, goody...here come the melodramatic statements.

flan

---

 Haha...you must be joking right? Coming from you this is highly amusing.

---

 Nope, just quoting YOUR words.

flan

Tinydancer wrote:

---

No. You had to be joking because I've seen your melodrama for anything and all things sexual. You have no problem with a teenager getting an abortion but God forbid she want's to try an alternative treatment.

---

 Please stop telling me what I believe.

flan

Tinydancer wrote:

---

Ok. You prefer the government to do that any way. Funny how my statements are melodrama but yours are just your opinion...lol

---

 In this ONE case, I agree with the decision. And I am not the only one who does.

flan

flan327 wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Tinydancer wrote:

---

So her mother shouldn't have been allowed to let her try alternative treatments because the government knows best? I will never agree with that. Civil liberties and all that you know.

---

 I agree with you completely.  The government should not be involved AT ALL. 

---

 Question, LL:

Would the age of the child have any bearing on your feelings?

flan

---

Not in these circumstances and with these facts.  They were not ignoring it and refusing treatment, they wanted to try alternative treatments.  Chemotherapy is not the only treatment for cancer.  Plus, they had already gone through 2 rounds of chemo when this choice was being made. 

tlc wrote:

---

I know that when I was 16 I was the one to sign consent for a major surgery I was having. So, a 17 almost 18 year old can certainly make an informed decision about treatment. If government can mandate a treatment against a parents' wishes, then why the hell aren't they forcing the anti-vaxxer idiots to vaccinate their kids?

---

 That is an excellent point. 

Tinydancer wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

Tinydancer wrote:

---

huskerbb wrote:

---

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

ed11563 wrote:

---

I know what to do_sometimes wrote:

---

Yep, and in 6 months when or if it comes back, then what?

---

Then she can go hide somewhere and die miserably in peace.

Or maybe she will go on to live a full life. At lest now she has a chance.

 

---

 Her treatments put her through a hell she chose not to go through.  Perhaps her mind thought has changed.  But if not, it was wasted and put her through pain she didn't want.

---

No, they didn't.  Read the article. She even says they weren't as bad as she thought they'd be and that she might not have fought it so hard if she had known.

Basically, those who wanted her to get treatments were right--and those who didn't were full of crap 

---

 So you'd be ok if they forced YOU to take some kind of treatment you were against? Yes the treatments might be what saved her, or maybe an alternative she was willing to try would have. The government has no right to tell me what kind of medical treatment I can and cannot choose. If the government said tomorrow that all men must be circumcised or all women must have double mastectomies because it will lessen the likelihood of cancer you'd get right on board with that...lol

---

But you and I, are adults--she was not, is not.  We don't let children make their own medical decisions--and this is the very reason why.  They can't appreciate the consequences of their decisions.  Clearly, knowing what she knows now, she would have chosen differently in the first place.  

---

 Except her mother agreed with her. So parents should be forced by the government to do what she feels is wrong. They we're not even allowed to look at alternative treatments. So much for you spouting about government interference and how you're so against it.

-- Edited by Tinydancer on Tuesday 10th of March 2015 08:38:11 AM

---

No.  They should not be allowed to kill their children.  

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

flan327 wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Tinydancer wrote:

---

So her mother shouldn't have been allowed to let her try alternative treatments because the government knows best? I will never agree with that. Civil liberties and all that you know.

---

 I agree with you completely.  The government should not be involved AT ALL. 

---

 Question, LL:

Would the age of the child have any bearing on your feelings?

flan

---

Not in these circumstances and with these facts.  They were not ignoring it and refusing treatment, they wanted to try alternative treatments.  Chemotherapy is not the only treatment for cancer.  Plus, they had already gone through 2 rounds of chemo when this choice was being made. 

---

Alternative treatments=NOTHING.  They are BS.   

---

 In many cases, I agree. If they actually worked, a doctor would recommend them.

flan

huskerbb wrote:

---

Bottom line--this WORKED--and even the teen admits she would likely make a different decision if she had it to do over.

We don't let kids make these kinds of decisions--and the state has a duty to protect children from abusive/neglectful parents, which is what this mother was.

---

 From the article:

The case centered on the "mature minor doctrine" recognized by several other states — whether 16- and 17-year-olds are mature enough to make their own medical decisions.

flan

huskerbb wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

flan327 wrote:

---

Lawyerlady wrote:

---

Tinydancer wrote:

---

So her mother shouldn't have been allowed to let her try alternative treatments because the government knows best? I will never agree with that. Civil liberties and all that you know.

---

 I agree with you completely.  The government should not be involved AT ALL. 

---

 Question, LL:

Would the age of the child have any bearing on your feelings?

flan

---

Not in these circumstances and with these facts.  They were not ignoring it and refusing treatment, they wanted to try alternative treatments.  Chemotherapy is not the only treatment for cancer.  Plus, they had already gone through 2 rounds of chemo when this choice was being made. 

---

Alternative treatments=NOTHING.  They are BS.   

---

 Oh so you're a doctor. Do some research before you spout off about something you don't know. Huskers way is not the only way no matter what you think...lol.