Parenting and the Government

[Paula62]

It's really a matter of finding the right spot on the very gray line. Government does, and I believe should, have programs to protect children from neglect and abuse. And this is a fairly recent development in our history. So let me pose this quesiton: If a five year old child was diagnosed with a cancerous tumor for which the medically agreed treatment was surgical removal, would you consider the parents neglectful if they just never got around to scheduling the surgery? What if they made a considered decision not to do the surgery because they believe it would be a sin against god to alter the body? What if the child were 17 and was the one who believed it was a sin ? What if the child were five and the tumor was benign but severely disfiguring?

You get my point.

 

[sarah]

I was refering to the 17 year old boys specific case.
not all cases

 

[palefrost]

I found this on CNN, and I think this is a good resolution to the court having stuck its nose into a family's buisnessb...
Virginia court allows teen cancer victim to receive alternative treatment

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A Virginia court Wednesday allowed a teenage boy battling cancer to forgo chemotherapy and receive an alternative treatment.
A consent decree was signed to allow Abraham Cherrix, 16, to receive an alternative treatment from a specialist in Mississippi.
Virginia's Department of Social Services had argued that if Abraham Cherrix, 16, did not undergo chemotherapy, the most common treatment for cancer, it would constitute medical neglect. Cherrix and his family had favored the Hoxsey treatment, which involves herbal medicines.
Speaking after the ruling, Cherrix expressed his relief that the court battle was over and he would be able to move forward with his treatment. -- From CNN Correspondent Joe Johns and Senior Producer Steve Turnham (Posted 10:54 a.m.)

This is great news. Let the kid decide what he wants to do. the last time he had chemo he said it almost killed him. I think we all have the right to decide how we want to go out. Lets give him some dignity

 

[sarah]

to me, it all comes down to the fact that we have the right to choose what medical treatment we want to undergo. no one should be able to force treatment on another person. (children however are the responsability of their care givers)

 

[Paula62]

The minor in this case was 16, i also seem to remember that his parents were in agreement with his decision. he had already undergone one round of chemo, and refused the second round.
I think the gov should butt out....this is a personal choice and he shouldn't be required to explain his actions. His doctors had told him what he was facing. This isn't any different than any right to die case ie, Terry Schaivo...Tom Delays father, or any person facing a terminal illness who decides to triple his pain meds..... i do think if the kid had been any younger the court would have been right to at least look into the circumstances....but at 16 if he is otherwise mentally fit, and his parents support it....it's their choice

 

[sarah]

So long as the person is mentally ready and able to make such a decision, I agree that the government has no place in the decision making process. I also agree that had the child been younger, or unable to fully make such a decision the government should have the right to look into the case.