No right to avoid chemo
Categories: Kids 8-11, Medical conditions, Home remedies
An eleven-year-old Canadian boy battling Leukemia has decided he doesn't want to undergo any more chemotherapy. His family doesn't want him to suffer anymore chemo either. The Children's Aid Society, however, has taken the boy into custody and is forcing him to undergo therapy. He was diagnosed at age seven with acute lymphoblastic leukemia which is curable eighty percent of the time.After being cancer-free for a year following a previous round of chemotherapy, the disease came back and he started treatment again. Now, however, he wants to switch to alternative treatment including chelation therapy, oregano and green tea. "He told us that he didn't want to undergo any more treatment because he felt that it wasn't going to give him quality of life, that he felt that it would probably take away his life," said the boy's father.
A judge had earlier ruled that the boy was not capable of understanding what it meant to refuse chemotherapy. According to his father, the boy has fetal alcohol syndrome and is somewhat intellectually delayed.
Recent Posts
- Weekend Fun and Games (7/03/2009)
- Kids and Extracurriculars - When Do You Let Them Quit? (7/03/2009)
- Twitter Follow Friday on ParentDish! (7/03/2009)
- Lush Lashes (7/03/2009)
- Abigail Breslin Makes $13 a Week (7/03/2009)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Momma 5-13-2008 @ 5:52PM
80% cure rate plus he has FAS? He isn't capable of making those choices. I think his parents are not making the right choice for him either, but I don't think he needed to be taken away from them.
Reply
Karen 5-13-2008 @ 6:38PM
This is a topic that really gets my blood boiling. The PARENTS get to decide whether or not he continues treatment. This is a very personal decision and quality of life SHOULD be a factor.
A child shouldn't get to make the decision, but certainly, they should have input WITH THE PARENTS.
Even in cases where doctors say there is a good chance that he could be cured, it is the PARENT's call. Parents are the ones that take EVERYTHING into consideration.
Doctors want to treat the body medically, but there is more to life than just your physical body. While I in NO WAY support any kind of active steps to hasten death (at any age), I do believe we have the right to refuse treatment, especially something that can be as devastating as chemotherapy.
I don't know that in this case, I agree with the parents, but I totally support their right to make the call unless they are proven to be unable to understand. No agreeing with the doctors does not mean they do not understand.
Reply
Randy 5-14-2008 @ 1:03AM
In the words of Karen,"This is a topic that really gets my blood boiling" The child is 11 years old--according to the article, there is am 80% chance of a cure--that's 80 people out of 100 cured. I wouldn't allow a parent or the child to make that decision. If the there is an 80% chance of a cure--then the child and family should be forced to take it. He can complain in 7 years time when he is 18 and of legal age-- or 10 years if it is 21--how he would rather have died.
Randy
Karen 5-14-2008 @ 7:38AM
Well Randy, and what if he is one of the 20%? He has already been through this before. So, he should be put through this misery again and still may die or just prolong his misery? Based on odds? Do you take nothing else into consideration?
What puts YOU in the position to make this decision for HIM and the PARENTS who know this child best?
That is arrogant and disgusting. How DARE YOU decide what is best for this child? How DARE YOU think that YOU KNOW based on odds and no personal interaction with this child what is better for him than his parents?
Reading the story -- I would probably go with the odds to, but no way am I taking this responsibility away from his parents. They are the ones that have to live with the decision. It doesn't effect you at all.
I can tell you right now that I would flat out defy any court that tried to tell me how to make medical decisions for my child. I would do everything possible to keep the government and doctors OUT of this decision. I would take the steps (legal or otherwise) necessary to prevent them from taking custody as well.
This is one of the WORST violations you can commit against the parent/child relationship and unless the parents are proven imcompetent - it is THEIR call.
mary 5-13-2008 @ 9:20PM
quality of life?! they're acting like chemo lasts forever. i had chemo treatments and they only last a coupla months, at most. my quality of life is very fine now, tyvm. i'm a 2 yr survivor and have been to disneyworld, england and egypt in the last 2 yrs. how's that for quality?
Reply
mamaloo 5-13-2008 @ 9:35PM
This is actually happening in my hometown. I feel for the family.
It is such a complicated issue.
What is not complicated is the CAS getting involved. They've been quietly pushing the boundaries of their jurisdiction and they really messed this situation up. The doctor is legally bound to contact CAS if parents refuse treatment that will put a child in mortal danger. But, the choice to not participate in chemotherapy and instead participate in alternative, non chemical therapy was the boy's, FAS or not.
First, they must show a court order to apprehend the boy, which they did not.
Secondly, is it ethical to remove an 11 year old who is a cancer patient from his family who is capable of adequately attending to his day to day needs in order to stick him in a foster home? Will that help this boy? Wasn't there a better way of doing this? Could the CAS not have left the boy in custody but taken steps to arbitrate a solution?
While the treatment for this cancer has an 80% success rate, this is a recurrence of leukemia. It is no wonder the boy doesn't want to relive his chemotherapy and is willing to try an alternative treatment.
Finally, why is the boy not allowed to seek alternative treatment while being monitored in tandem by a pediatric oncologist?
Reply
Randy 5-14-2008 @ 1:07AM
The reason the treatment is alternative is that it doesn't work. Using an alternative treatment like this is basically the same as using faith healing to treat diabetes.
Randy
Reply
Jim 5-14-2008 @ 1:47AM
This is bullshit, as is the sanctimony of life.
This is supposed to be a free country. What does that mean anymore? Doodley-squat! every jerk-wad with a self righteous opinion thinks that he/she has the right to tell me how I should live, act and think. What right has the government, or any of you other sanctimonious morons have to tell me, or this kid, or anyone else, what's right for me or them?
Moreover, who died and made you gods to decide that life at any cost, situation. or amount of suffering is better than no life at all?
Who has the right to tell me that I have to take medications that in many instances do no more than make pharmacological companies richer? One doctor says this is your problem; take this chemical. Another doctor says, no this is your problem, take this one. And much of the time that doctor is just pushing the "cure" from the company who pays him off best.
Then they tell you crap like there is no clinical study that suggests that tea and honey can help your cold. Why? because there is no profit in that study. But there is plenty of profit in medicines with chemical compounds you can't pronounce that are no better. But they have been proven to benefit those who took it 60% of the time compared to those who took placebo. (Side effects may include sore throat, itching, loss of sight, anal bleeding, and in some instances death.)
Ever been on chemo? many of you idiots screamed out against the tourture at Gitmo, that make chemotherapy seem like a day at the spa.
I'm an AMERICAN. I have the inalienable right to decide how I live, or how and when I die.
That's called freedom and the very definition of liberty.
Reply
Dad 5-14-2008 @ 5:19AM
Oh no, I'm sorry, but I hope that was not a father speaking.
I suppose with that logic he would also suggest your 11 year old child should be allowed to decide any number of things for himself or herself. Yikes.
No, in fact, we do not have the "freedom" or "liberty" to act irresponsibly and endanger others.
Don 5-14-2008 @ 8:10AM
No one has the right to tell YOU what to do with your life however, people of this DEMOCRACY, decided they didn't like seeing people abuse children. Which is what these parents are doing by trying to encourage their child to use pseudoscience as a cure.
So the government was pushed by the people of said democracy to begin intervening in the welfare of children, I say for the benefit of this particular child
This is very simple, if you want to convince everyone that pseudoscience works. Get funding from the voodoo companies that push your alternative crap to start a study that uses the proper guidelines(Scientific Method) that will create data and show how your said voodoo works. Then submit completed study to every medical journal available. The Medical industry will then review, methods, standards, and outcome of the study. They will then attempt to repeat your study to confirm that is does indeed work. If it does then you have just changed the medical science.
Until that is done to one will listen to you no matter how much you yell about it, just provide proof, not just any proof good repeatable proof.
I would love nothing more if you could prove that oregano and green tea can cure cancer. But the fact remains it cannot not matter what you say or believe.
As for doctors never prescribing honey for example colds YOUR WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Click the link: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/90594.php
Stop hating the doctors that are trying to help humanity, do they make money while doing so, yes. They've also trained for in excess for 8 years for the privilege helping humanity better itself, they deserve a little pay in return for their hard work.
Karen 5-14-2008 @ 11:15AM
Yes, we have the government to step in and protect the welfare of children when parents are incapable of providing that care. BUT, this is not a cut and dry issue. I know of many people with successful chemo treaments and many others who said it was the worst choice they made. The parents aren't neglecting this child, they just CHOOSE a different path. This is not cut and dry and when there are grey areas, the parents get to choose.
Right now we do not have laws making it mandatory for you to follow doctors orders. Until we do - the parent is the decision making authority for the child.
Reply
Don 5-14-2008 @ 12:00PM
The child was taken into by by the Children's Aid Society, because the state(Canada) feels that the parent's were going to neglect him.
As for the child's actual feeling about cancer treatment they cannot have much merit, because his father seems to be pushing these "alternative" remedies upon him. Parents have a strong influence what a child believes at that age. "The boy also has Fetal Alcohol Syndrome and is Intellectually delayed". Said the Father
So we should be secure in knowing that the boy's desires are in his own best interest, doubtful.
The father sounds like a whacko and boy should be removed from his care for the remainder of his youth.
Randy 5-14-2008 @ 12:13PM
I will admit that I am really only familiar with the standard and mores of the USA--but in the USA, we the people have decided that usually parents have the paramount right in making decisions for their children. One of the the situations where society has determined that it is proper to intervene is in matters regarding critical illnesses that have a reasonable chance of being cured. If the chance for cure had been less then I am sure the physicians would not have called the child protection services. If the childs cancer has a reasonable chance of responding to therapy, then yes he should be made to to tkae it. And yes, I have no idea how debilitating chemotherapy is--the majority of us probably don't. But if the result at the end of the day is a live child as opposed to a dead one--then I think the choice is obvious. And as a previous post noted--when oregano and green tea are proven to cure cancer, I'll be all for it. The drug companies and and phsycians are not perfect--drug companies especially--but for now at least they have a better track record than the alternative therapies.
Randy 5-14-2008 @ 12:13PM
From a previous post--"Right now we do not have laws making it mandatory for you to follow doctors orders. Until we do - the parent is the decision making authority for the child. "
You are entirely right-there are no laws making it mandatory to follow physicians orders. On the other hand--at least in the USA there are mandatory laws for physicians to report to the authorities behavior that they feel is life threatening to the child. The physicians felt that this was the case. They presented the case to the authorities and the authorities agreed.
Karen 5-14-2008 @ 12:46PM
Well, the authorities are wrong. It happens. A lot! Thankfully, in our democratic society (which isn't democratic by the way), hopefully a judge or someone will step in and do the right thing.
And if it were my child, I would violate the law rather than allow them to over-ride what I thought was best for my child. My utmost venom is reserved for people support the government in these cases.
I'm not advocating alternative treatments, and I'm not even saying that the child is the deciding factor, although I do believe he should have some voice, but in grey areas such as these, the parents should be the one to make the call (providing they are capable of understanding). But you can't say that not agreeing with the doctors mean they don't understand.
The authorities should step in ONLY to determine if the parents understand the medical choices given to them. If so, then they decide. If the child disagrees with the parent, then someone should step in to see that the child wishes are considered as well.
But in this case, they should have the right to refuse medical treatment that is debilitating even if YOU don't like the odds of whatever whack treatment they want to use.
Randy 5-14-2008 @ 1:04PM
From a previous poster--
"But in this case, they should have the right to refuse medical treatment that is debilitating even if YOU don't like the odds of whatever whack treatment they want to use."
That's just so wrong in so many ways--I will however admit--that these postings have made me back track slightly after some thought. There might be situations where I would agree that treatment should not be pushed on the family. HOWEVER if the situation is exactly like that depicted above --and in real life no situation ever is--but if the situation above were the entire situation then heck yes the child should have the treatment.
Randy
Reply
hailee 5-14-2008 @ 5:50PM
I'm 13 years old, and have been a cancer survivor for 12 years.
Some of the doctors tried to convince my parents to give me chemo. luckily my parents looked at the options and decided not to.
the cancer was totally removed from my body, and guess what? no relapses either!
I believe that a child of 11, can have SOME right to how they live, and what they have to go through.
You guys are all saying "oh i've been through chemo, it's not that bad..." Well guess what, you're adults. have you ever seen pictures of young children who are going through chemo? How absolutely drained of life they look? AND yet they usually manage to keep a positive outlook on life. So let me just say, Ha! you've gotta be kidding me! this kid knows what he's talking about. he's been through many chemo treatments. and they're torture. of course they are!
What would it be like to be an 11 year old boy and not be able to run around, or get into a little mischief?
Did any of you miss the bit about the ALTERNATIVE treatment? If there's an 80% chance of survival, does that have anything to do with what kind of treatment? who says that chemo is the only way?
and again. i must say. 11 years old? and you think that he has ABSOLUTELY no right to decide for himself?? yes, legally an 11 year old should not be able to decide everything about their life for themself. but they should have some right to how they live. or the "torture they endure.
One more thing, i know i said my age, maybe that was a stupid thing. But dont you dare go thinking that i'm too young to understand, or dont know what i'm talking about. I can understand things a lot better than many adults. and i have geniune debates with my parents on many topics (politics, religion, etc.). Not to "toot my own horn" and all. but just saying. i refuse to be treated like a child who has no idea what they're talking about....
Reply
Yolanda 5-14-2008 @ 6:48PM
I'm going through chemo right now and I 37 years. It is doable. 80%? I would definitely do it. But it is not like they are refusing treatments they are talking about chosing another route. Is that not they're choice? Taking a sick kid away from parents who clearly want to honor their child's wishes is just wrong. They really are messing with his quality of life because at a time like this family who loves you is very much NEEDED.
Reply
Pamela 5-14-2008 @ 11:48PM
You people aren't getting the whole story. It COULD have an 80% cure rate IF it's caught early and treated promptly. Since this is his second occurence, his rates of survival go down. There is information on this at The Sick Kid's website if you want to look at it.
I have worked with children with cancer, the treatment is difficult, every child has to be treated individually, and responds in a different manner. He may require ongoing chemo for up to 22 months.
Reply
M.CHANDLER 7-24-2008 @ 3:41PM
RE COMMENT: mary May 13th 2008 9:19PM
quality of life?! they're acting like chemo lasts forever. i had chemo treatments and they only last a coupla months, at most. my quality of life is very fine now, tyvm. i'm a 2 yr survivor and have been to disneyworld, england and egypt in the last 2 yrs. how's that for quality?
-------------------------------------------
Well Mary, GOOD FOR you! You're ONE of small % of the LUCKY ONES!! You are correct that CHEMO doesn't last forever. In your case, it was a couple of months, and your alive and feel fine.
However, for the majority of cancers being treated with Chemo, it is a couple of months per cycle. Usually 2-4 weeks of no treatment, so it doesn't kill you immediately, then, on to the 2nd cycle. This is normally repeated over and over, unless you have too many white blood cells, becuz the CHEMO is killing the red ones rapidly. Which means that you'll more than likely DIE SOON! Sooner usually, than if you had NOT had the treatment at all. ALOT of people take CHEMO over a period of a year or two,some longer, ONLY TO BE TOLD in the end that there's nothing else they can do, so here's a morphin pump, and a # to contact Hospice. Most die not of the CANCER ITSELF, but the SIDE effects of the TOXINS that WERE your CHEMO treatmants!! DO some research MARY, before you comment in such a Uncompassionate, judgemental way. You are 2 yrs in the clear,and GOD BLESS for that, BUT you still have 3 more before your considered out of the woods, or FINE. May you have many more yrs of feeling fine, and CANCER FREE.
These parents have EVERY RIGHT, or SHOULD, to seek ALERNATIVE MEDICINE if THEY so choose!!!! It is an absolute OUTRAGE that this child has been removed from them for this reason. Especially when they have gone the TRADITIONAL MEDICINE route already, THAT HASN'T WORKED!!!!!
This decision will negetivly effect this child more than YOU or the COURTS/GOV will EVER KNOW, or ADMIT to. OH yeah...YOU/COURTS/GOV, DO NOT KNOW or LOVE this child and YOU/COURTS/GOV, won't MISS or BE DEVESTASTED, when this CHILD is no longer on this earth, but with the angels!
Not to mention that the parents will live on without the child they love, possibley because of People who had NO RIGHT to make a decision such as this. DO SOME RESEARCH!!! MOST of the crap we feed on NEW TREATMENTS and CURES, is BULL***T being washed into your brain by "BIG, PROFITING, VERY POWERFUL...BIG PHARMA!! YOU WILL NEVER SEE A CURE FOUND FOR ANY CANCERS BECAUSE THEY MAKE BILLIONS off your demise. :(
Reply