Who has rights over a child's treatment?
Categories: Safety, Development, Media, That's Entertainment
I read this story about a very sick little girl with a growing lump in my throat. Like most parents, I can imagine nothing worse in life than watching my child suffer.
8-year old Leah Beth Richards has a very rare form of cancer. For the last several years, the little girl has been subject to a variety of painful procedures that have left her weak, battered, and disillusioned. Though she fought valiantly through several rounds of chemotherapy and radiation, Leah Beth eventually looked at her Mom very seriously, and said she could not take it anymore. She asked her Mother to end her treatment and provide her with some peace.
Leah Beth's Mother had a horrible decision on her hands, but she says she knew in her heart that her daughter had not made her request lightly. She informed the hospital that she wanted to halt the last few rounds of radiation. The hospital responded that they would be bringing in Child Services.
It's currently illegal in Britain for children to make decisions about their medical care. Parents also have limited to no rights. If Doctors feel medical treatment is in the child's best interest, despite the wishes of the parents and child, they will immediately involve Child Protection Services.
Leah Beth was forced to partake in the remainder of her radiation sessions. Her parents were carefully watched so they did not interfere with the process. Leah Beth informed her Father that she will never trust him again -- but she is doing OK for the moment.
I understand the rationale behind laws that do not allow children to make their own medical decisions. But in a case like this, shouldn't some consideration be given to the parents who have struggled with their daughter for so many years? What do you think?
8-year old Leah Beth Richards has a very rare form of cancer. For the last several years, the little girl has been subject to a variety of painful procedures that have left her weak, battered, and disillusioned. Though she fought valiantly through several rounds of chemotherapy and radiation, Leah Beth eventually looked at her Mom very seriously, and said she could not take it anymore. She asked her Mother to end her treatment and provide her with some peace.
Leah Beth's Mother had a horrible decision on her hands, but she says she knew in her heart that her daughter had not made her request lightly. She informed the hospital that she wanted to halt the last few rounds of radiation. The hospital responded that they would be bringing in Child Services.
It's currently illegal in Britain for children to make decisions about their medical care. Parents also have limited to no rights. If Doctors feel medical treatment is in the child's best interest, despite the wishes of the parents and child, they will immediately involve Child Protection Services.
Leah Beth was forced to partake in the remainder of her radiation sessions. Her parents were carefully watched so they did not interfere with the process. Leah Beth informed her Father that she will never trust him again -- but she is doing OK for the moment.
I understand the rationale behind laws that do not allow children to make their own medical decisions. But in a case like this, shouldn't some consideration be given to the parents who have struggled with their daughter for so many years? What do you think?
Recent Posts
- Heart-Shaped Valentine's Day Crafts (2/09/2010)
- Study Suggests Link Between Autism and Parents' Ages (2/09/2010)
- Just Chute Me! (Or: Do We REALLY Have to Play with Our Kids?) (2/09/2010)
- Atlanta Billboards Proclaim 'Black Children Are An Endangered Species' (2/09/2010)
- Canadian Hospital Offers Surgery for Obese Children (2/09/2010)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
emjaybee 3-19-2007 @ 9:07AM
I don't know British law, but it seems to me this is something a judge could help with. Let the dr's and parents make their case, and let an impartial judge decide who gets to make the decision based on the evidence of what's best for the child. I would say, most of the time parents should decide, but there are times parents are being abusive or neglectful and so a concerned doctor should have the right to challenge it. But it should not be all one way or the other.
Reply
Jenny 3-19-2007 @ 9:52AM
Well, this is an article from the tabloid the Daily Mail, which makes me take it with a grain of salt. I think their articles are designed to evoke emotion and they overplay or downplay some facts to get the emotional response. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Mail
The fact is, in this case the father did consent to treatment. Yes, he did so after the doctor threatened to go to Child Protective Services, but the fact is that it never went to court and one doesn't know that the court wouldn't have sided with the child.
As sad as these cases are, I don't think there is any one form of legislation that could cover all the possibilities, which is why it is probably better for courts to decide each case on its individual merits.
Reply
LS 3-19-2007 @ 9:47AM
I think the doctors are completely off-base here. Why not sit down with the parents first, and discuss the options? If he truly does think that *this* course is going to do the trick (where the other two or three did not), perhaps he can show them why, and change their (and their daughter's) minds. Perhaps he's using a different drug, or dose, or whatever. But to immediately run to Child Protective Services is ridiculous. Unfortunately, it seems as though the law is on the side of the medical community in this one, and emjaybee's suggestion of bringing a judge in, while a good one, probably wouldn't matter.
Think about this poor kid the next time you take up a crusade for Universal (Socialized) Healthcare. Because this is what it's all about. If you're healthy, fine. If not, look out.
Reply
SKL 3-19-2007 @ 10:58AM
I agree with many of the sentiments that have been expressed here. A human's body should be treated with dignity, regardless of the scientific motivation to try everything however physically and emotionally painful.
I have to comment that if the patient's or her parents' objection had anything to do with religion, many of the commenters would have denied the rights of the child or the parents to make a decision. But religious identity is just as important to human dignity as the other aspects that concern the blogger and the above posters. I think it's sad that the minute we bring religion into anything, a lot of people are prepared to scoff. It should be the other way around: religious rights should be protected from intervention by any entity connected to the government, including child services, courts, etc.
Reply
Kimberly 3-19-2007 @ 11:36AM
LS, this story has nothing to do with Universal Healthcare. Universal Healthcare does not mean that you lose the right to refuse treatment. Having had a critically ill child and having been forced to contemplate the effects of various treatments and what I would and would not allow in the name of "quality of life" I can say with absolute authority that parents, and patients, do have rights in these situations.
I can also say with absolute authority that had my child become ill under a health care system like yours instead of in Canada, at best I would be financially crippled for the rest of my life. At worst, my vibrant, healthy 3 year old daughter would be 2 years in her grave instead of 2 years tumour free.
Reply
Alex 3-21-2007 @ 10:19PM
Have you ever read "My Sister's Keeper" by Jodi Picoult? It deals with this same type of issue in a roundabout way. Gripping book.
Reply