Connecticut Supreme Court upholds ruling that teen must undergo chemo

Interesting response. But not a conservative one. You are supporting the right of the State to overrule a parent's will. Plenty of conservatives on here are calling this "the end of freedom" and other such things. I wonder how much of your response is bound by your own experience? Do you think the State should have the right to overrule a parent and determine what medical care should be given to their child? (I do by the way, in cases such as this where the parent's decision is clearly perverse).

 

I didn't watch the video but too many Dr. are pawns for this corporation or that corporation. I don't trust a single one of them.

 

I understand your point of view but it is not our place to force anyone to do anything. You can tell your property what to do. If you own this girl then it is your right to save her life. Obviously the government believes it is their right. She is the property of the IMF (International Monetary Fund) just like every other American.

Let's entertain a different view. Say the chemo works only for the cancer to return again. I'm not aware of the stats on how much this happens but I have heard of it happening many times before. Now we must force more poisonous chemo to save her again. At what point does this become torture?

 

I love conservatives. The only freedom they care about is the right to die, the right to fail, the right to starve, etc.

When it comes to the right to live a healthy life, the various rights to actually DO something. OH NOOO...the government has no part there. If you're sick, old, impoverished and want to LIVE, sorry, can't help.

But some girl with a better than even chance of survival thinks she should die because mummy dearest thinks chemo is icky? Oh, yes, we must protect people's rights to do insane (*)(*)(*)(*) that nobody in their right mind would want to, but never those of people to do what everybody must to survive.

I say grant em BOTH their wish, shoot the (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) mother too.

 

When you say "I am not aware of the stats..." doesn't this suggest a state of ignorance that should make you cautious about silly "what ifs"?

Doctors do not torture people, nor do nurses. The State only steps in when parents behave grossly irresponsibly.

We have a conservative on here who has experience of this and who suggests that the parents should have opted for treatment in this case and not to do so is unreasonable. The State has also taken this position and has moved to protect this child from parents who are basically abusing her for their beliefs.

There are some who believe children are owned by their parents and their parents have some sort of power of life or death over them. This feudal nonsense has no place today. The courts are there to protect the citizen from an over mighty State. These decisions require multiple signoffs from different professionals. The checks and balances are as they should be.

 

Thing is its not your decision or mine.

 

if she was my daughter I would have a hard time letting her make that decision. At the same time I would not want her to suffer.

 

No one has brought up the fact that Fox News was the source the OP used. This story should be discredited because Fox News propagandizes everything...... Right?

 

I'm glad there is a happy ending to your story. I'm a firm believer in peoples rights. I'm against the socialist beliefs that you or anyone else has the right to make someone go through a terrible experience because you believe that it is for the better. It's not your right.

 

If she wanted to live I would support that right of hers. She obviously doesn't feel that way. I don't support you or anyone else telling other people how to be happy. When did God put you in charge of life? Obviously that was a mistake because you are willing to sacrifice the mother's life even though she chooses to live.

 

Every thing is not black and white. Fox does more than their fair share of spinning stories. Why spin this story? What would be the motive? I could have used a different network for a link. Fox wasn't the only news network that reported on it.

 

So, Fox only spins the stories you believe they spin?

 

You're taking to someone who's daughter went thru hell w/chemo and came back a survivor, now cancer free....."chemo could kill you, chemo could cause cancer later in life".....

"Would'uv, should'uv, could'uv"..... is that how you live your life?

There are no guarantees in life as we all know - it's a gamble. Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose by the choices you make. You can't sit on your haunches and say 'but what if", particularly when it comes to something as serious as cancer. You take the advise of the experts and go for it and you do it fast. My kids cancerous cells were still in clusters and that's the time to zap them b/f the clusters break open and starts spreading thru out her body. Her Oncologist did it and it worked......

Permanent damage chemo does to your body? Such as, that's so devastating that the cancer survivor would rather be dead? Chemo destroys brain cells that effects the memory, so my kid will forget things easily..... would she rather be dead b/c of this forgetfulness or would she rather write notes to herself? She chose the latter.....

Chemo destroys the immune system. Now granted, that's not fun b/c you have to be super careful about ..... everything! I remember that long, long list of 'do NOT'. Her immune system is now up and running normally, according to her Oncologist. Her hair grew back a different color and a mass of curls, which was beautiful, she put her weight back on, the constant fatigue is gone and the nightmare is gone.

If a young person diagnosed w/cancer is going to cave in and say 'Oh, poor me! I'm just going to let it kill me b/c chemo is just to rough to go thru" .... now that's sad to give up on life so easily.....

As I said, I know several people who had bouts w/cancer and went thru the chemo and some also radiation. Not fun, but they're here and living full lives...

I know this one gal that everyone should meet. She's 47, diagnosed w/cancer at the base of her head when she was 10, went thru the chemo/radiation, came out of it w/a smile. She's had medical problems every since, physical and neurological - never ending for her, but what a fighter. Always has laughter bubbling out of her, lifting other people's spirits.... she is a true story of inspiration.

Btw, want to tell people here how her cancer was discovered. I found it very interesting. Her mom told me when Yvonne was 9, always complaining bout headaches, her mom kept taking her to her dr and he kept saying 'there's nothing wrong w/her'. Mom pretty much gave up since that's the only answer she got.....

Then she took Yvonne to the eye dr for an exam. The dr told her mom "there's something wrong here and it's not her vision".... then the cancer was discovered b/c of the sharp EYE dr - amazing.

There's thousands of interesting, inspirational stories out there about cancer survivors who took that chance w/chemo and won. To bad the mother of the 17 yr old doesn't encourage her daughter to pay attention to this fact, develop a positive attitude and become a fighter......

Anyway, that's my opinion about this very serious matter.......

 

Says who? You? By what authority?

 

Wellllll.....the law says that girls under 18 are not mature enuf to consent to intercourse....

So.... you really think a 17 yr old is mature enuf to make her own decision that could very possibly cause her own death?

Not picking on you, just want to pick your brain........

 

The girls is nuts thinking carrot-mango juice or whatever would save her. Good on them for stopping her nonsense.

 

And yet women consent all the time. Laws that dont make sense still... dont make sense.

This same girl could have gotten an abortion without her mothers knowledge at 17.

instead she DOESNT want a medical procedure done that she has fully researched.

Less emotion more logic...

 

That would be your assumption.

- - - Updated - - -

you are a good socialist

 

What gives you the right? Who made you the decider? By who's authority? The constitution and the bill of rights secure this girl's rights for the pursuit of happiness and if that means she does not want the poison to be happy it is her right. Like it or not.

 

Dodge noted, but I will not cower from your questions. I do not make a claim that I am right, nor the decider, nor an authority on anything... I am a person with an opinion... just like you. The Constitution and The Bill of Rights is subjective and wide open to interpretation... you have given me your interpretation but as I do not see you as a as an authority on The Constitution and The Bill of Rights I say thank you for your opinion.

 

Better than being a bad member of the "pro-life" side of the aisle.

 

Sure there's teen gals giving consent as young as 12, m/b even younger, but the statutory rape law is still there for their protection.

True about the easy access for abortions for these young girls and the parents aren't aware, thanks to the liberals, but this is about a 17 yr old kid being allowed by her mother to call the shots about her serious health issue, which could very easily lead to her death......

Well, you and i will just agree to disagree on this one.........

 

You're kidding.....she thinks drinking that stuff is a 'cure'? Wow! Sad.

 

your talking to someone that had cancer and went through chemo themselves, I would much rather make the choice myself then the government make it for me...

I also had a friend that died during chemo, so this is a gamble no matter what choice you make, it should be your choice to make, had he not went through chemo he would of had a 70% chance of survival, he like me gambled on the higher survival rate, he lost, I won, just like your daughter won the fight

the question is not, can Chemo help people, it helps many, the question is should the government be able to FORCE you to get chemo when the odds of survival without Chemo is 70% (just surgery) and with Chemo is 90%

the percents change depending on the cancer, so obviously were not talking about cancers that do not have a good survival rate with surgery alone

I think this issue is to complex for a government mandated you must always have chemo no mater what law.. .common sense doesn't fair well with such laws

the gov could offer to pay for all childrens cancer treatments, that would help take the money aspect out of the decision, not sure how you protect children from religious nutters

but the majority of people, like you and me would make the choice based on the information provided and make the best choice for ourselves and our children, this law would take that choice away from people like you and me

.

 

I'm not pro life I'm for people's rights. Her body belongs to her not you or any one else.