Connecticut Force Chemotherapy On Teen

Discussion in 'The War Room' started by klnOmega, Jan 15, 2015.

  1. klnOmega

    klnOmega Double Yellow Card Double Yellow Card

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2014
    Messages:
    9,552
    Likes Received:
    11,925
    http://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-teen-battles-chemo-order-0103-20150102-story.html#page=1

    A doctor diagnosed a 17 year old girl with Lymphoma. The parents wanted to get a second opinion, so the doctor contact social services. They arrested the parents, and took custody of the girl. She ran away twice after her first two treatments, and now they literally chain her to the bed for treatment.



    I feel like this sets a dangerous precedent. I'm not comfortable with Doctor's having this sort of power, nor with the state having the ability to force someone to go through horribly painful treatment.
     
  2. TheBox

    TheBox Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2008
    Messages:
    4,432
    Likes Received:
    7
    So basically the mother is a crackpot and is going to let her (minor) child die from a treatable illness?

    I have no problem with the state stepping in to save this girl's life.
     
  3. Hatestorm

    Hatestorm P4P Hottest Smelling Avatar

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2013
    Messages:
    8,770
    Likes Received:
    15,405
    Location:
    Untied Kinkydom
    Strange that someone would refuse treatment. The article mentions her being home schooled as well, so perhaps she lives a sheltered life with a deranged mother who filled her head with weird shit.

    Probably best that they take away the daughter, and try and teach her some reality.
     
  4. footodors

    footodors Brown Belt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2008
    Messages:
    3,911
    Likes Received:
    2,051
    Location:
    Rogue Island
    I think of that scene in Shawshank Redemption where Morgan Freeman is in front of the parole board and reflects on what his older self might have told his younger one in regards to all the stupid decisions the younger one made.
    When she is 30 with kids and still alive, I wonder what decision she would tell her 17 year old self to make?
     
  5. klnOmega

    klnOmega Double Yellow Card Double Yellow Card

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2014
    Messages:
    9,552
    Likes Received:
    11,925
    Most Doctor's refuse chemo treatment. It is a horrible, horrible experience.
     
  6. TheBox

    TheBox Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2008
    Messages:
    4,432
    Likes Received:
    7
    Most doctors do not refuse chemotherapy.
     
  7. klnOmega

    klnOmega Double Yellow Card Double Yellow Card

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2014
    Messages:
    9,552
    Likes Received:
    11,925
  8. ripskater

    ripskater Guest

    What's crazy is that at 17 she can choose to kill her own unborn baby (without consent) but she cannot choose an alternative treatment for her cancer.
     
  9. My little Tony

    My little Tony Orange Belt

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2009
    Messages:
    481
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Netherlands
  10. TheBox

    TheBox Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2008
    Messages:
    4,432
    Likes Received:
    7
    Look at what the specific question is asking. It's not about chemotherapy, generally, or even about their belief in chemotherapy's effectiveness for a particular situation.

    It posits a scenario where you're 60 years old and have *incurable stage 4 cancer* that has already spread from the lungs to the liver and bones.

    Thus, the question is really asking a preference between (a) uncomfortable treatment that may buy you a little more time and (b) trying to make what little time you have left comfortable.

    And a majority of respondents still picked (a).
     
  11. LucasWithLidOff

    LucasWithLidOff Double Yellow Card Double Yellow Card

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2012
    Messages:
    10,861
    Likes Received:
    5,996
    What's wrong with wanting to get a second opinion?
     
  12. TheBox

    TheBox Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2008
    Messages:
    4,432
    Likes Received:
    7
    It does, but not what you think. See my above post.
     
  13. klnOmega

    klnOmega Double Yellow Card Double Yellow Card

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2014
    Messages:
    9,552
    Likes Received:
    11,925
    The majority of doctors did not pick (a). They said they'd refuse.

    Even if the numbers are close, it says something. Chemo is horribly painful. No one should be forced into it.
     
  14. TheBox

    TheBox Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2008
    Messages:
    4,432
    Likes Received:
    7
  15. TheBox

    TheBox Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2008
    Messages:
    4,432
    Likes Received:
    7
    No, they didn't. The largest demographic (> 50%) said Yes at 2/3 rate. The group that only responded Yes at a 1/3 rate was the "Other" demographic.

    That chemotherapy is awful to go through is uncontroversial. No one needed a survey of that.

    Regardless, the claim that most doctors would refuse chemo is blatantly false.
     
  16. drstrangelov

    drstrangelov Hey.

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2005
    Messages:
    15,727
    Likes Received:
    5,016
    I think she's foolish, but don't think anyone should be forced to receive any unwanted medical treatment. I understand that children can't be expected to make the decision for themselves, but there's a sting of excess when it's being done to a 17 year old, practicality notwithstanding.

    From her perspective, beyond it just being miserable, there's a risk of sterility as a side effect to many treatments, which potentially creates a whole new mess for everyone involved down the line.
     
  17. WalkenWouldOwn

    WalkenWouldOwn Steel Belt

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2005
    Messages:
    32,571
    Likes Received:
    12,214
    [​IMG]


    Thought this was funny. Although at 17, she should probably be able to make up her own mind even if her decision is beyond fucking stupid.
     
  18. jackietreehorn8

    jackietreehorn8 fine

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2010
    Messages:
    13,441
    Likes Received:
    484
    In general I fully support these types of laws. They're in place to prevent bible-thumpers and other fringe characters from choosing to treat their child's diabeetus with prayer and essential oils instead of insulin.

    In this case it's complicated because A) the "child" in question is 17 years old and has her own opinion on the matter (she's not a helpless infant), and B) we're talking about chemotherapy, which is never a sure thing cure and comes with lots of problems of its own...it's not like a simple surgery that will definitely fix whatever someone's problem is.

    In the end though, the law had to pick some age of medical autonomy. It settled with 18, so this girl's medical decisions go through her mother. She's the same as an infant in the eyes of the law - doctors have to look to her mother for medical decisions. And anytime someone's medical decisions go through another person (parent/guardian) you should have a system of oversight in place...doctors that are backed by the legal system to prevent a negligent decision being made by one person on another person's behalf. Given that doctors think it's pretty much a 100% chance of death with no chemo, but an 85% chance of recovery with chemo, they made the call to try to save her life.
     
  19. ripskater

    ripskater Guest

    Some people actually die due to causes from chemotherapy. And don't die from the cancer.
     
  20. Codger

    Codger Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2014
    Messages:
    2,793
    Likes Received:
    1,600
    Really? You wouldn't force your say 8 year old child to receive life saving treatment? I most certainly would consider it my duty to do so. Seems to me it's purely an issue of her age being close to the 18 year threshold.

    But what age would you consider them too young? It has to be a somewhat arbitrary number and they've gone for below 18, which makes sense. Furthermore they've had a look at her mental state and deduced she's living in a fantasy which is not serving her well in this matter.

    And if they don't treat it will she definitely be sterile since she'll be dead too.

    This is very treatable. She has a decent chance of living if treated vs a almost 100% chance of dying if they don't. Some BS "alternative" treatment will do fuck all other than leach some cash and emotions out of the family.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.