|
|
|
|
|
| Hamilton boy with cancer forced to undergo chemo
Posted: 5/15/2008 8:17:42 AM | I was wondering what eveyones thoughts were on this ???
i dont believe the CAS should have any power over what we do with our childern unless there is 100% proof of some kind of physical child abuse, other then that what i would like to do with my child is my choice.
They say the 11year old boy is not old enough to know when something is making him sick and not feel well, yes he has cancer and yes he needs treatment but if he feels and the parents feel its not for him shouldnt that be their choice ????
If the boy is not old enough to make choices for himself then i guess he cannot make the choice to brush his teeth or tie his shoes or what he should have to eat in morning or lunch or dinner ? He shouldnt have the choice to what he should like on TV or which movies he enjoys because he is not old enough correct or does this only apply when it comes to his well being ?
I also hear that your child is custody of the state unless you go to court and have an order of the court state'n you have custody. If this is not done the people like CAS and others can come and take your child without no problem. At least if you have a court order state'n that you have custody then CAS would have to go through court to get child from you.
If anyone has anymore info about this let me know thx | |
|
| Hamilton boy with cancer forced to undergo chemo
Posted: 5/15/2008 3:15:44 PM | There was court case recently, I think in NYC where a black immigrant from Africa was brought to ER, conscious, lucid.
For his injury, one of the standard ER tasks was spinal inspection via the anus.
He refused, maybe for cultural reasons. Whatever, he refused. ER held him down and when up his anus anyway. He was raped. He sued, he lost.
With 600K dying from cancer annually, most of whom failed chemo, what they are forcing on the 11-year-old is wrong, since there is not guarantee of a cure. He's too young to decide for himself, but his parents can decide.
Chemo very often doesn't cure. There are reports showing the even when pediatric chemo appears to work for the original cancer, the chemo screws the kids up at the time when their bodies aren't mature and are very senstive, get screwed up in other ways. Long-term follow-up shows they often get various cancers and other diseases decades later.
If chemo was a certain cure, then it's a different situation.
If it were an emergency appedenctomy, a need for blood tranfusion, etc where the cure is almost certain with no side effects and little risk, then we have a different situation again.
Forcing dubious chemo on kid against his parents' wishes is medical fascism.
Involved are lawyers, doctors, hospitals, the state, and the individual. Which participant is most likely to get screwed? | |
|
| Hamilton boy with cancer forced to undergo chemo
Posted: 5/16/2008 2:31:57 PM | | This is true, i agree its quite wrong. I think its against the law of Canada as well in the Legislation that we are able to choice our medical care. I think its very wrong for any state to try and choice how we raise our childern. That should be the job of the parents, of course if the parents are abusive thats a different story. | |
|
| Hamilton boy with cancer forced to undergo chemo
Posted: 5/19/2008 5:26:56 AM |
unless there is 100% proof of some kind of physical child abuse, other then that what i would like to do with my child is my choice.
I think saying that what you would like to do with your child should be your choice is oversimplifying parenting. What about if you choose to let your child play frogger amongst the traffic on a highway? Or if you would like to see your child stick a fork into an electrical outlet and sit back and watch while they do so? Or what if you choose to dangle them off a 6 storey balcony? Child abuse extends to neglect of responsibility, and personally I think it might be clearer to say that decisions a parent makes for their children should go towards ensuring the safety, health, wellbeing and survival of that child.
They say the 11year old boy is not old enough to know when something is making him sick and not feel well, yes he has cancer and yes he needs treatment but if he feels and the parents feel its not for him shouldnt that be their choice ????
What sort of cancer is it? What is the cure rate? Without knowing that, I am commenting blind...but to me, to deny a child medical treatment that offers them, say, a 90% cure rate is denying that child the highest chance of survival and therefore would not be good parenting in my eyes. Yes chemo can make you feel sick, but if it increases the chance of long term survival then surely thats a matter of weighing up the factors...short term pain versus long term gain. I mean... vaccination needles hurt children...but the diseases they are being vaccinated against are worse. Putting disinfectant on a grazed knee hurts, stitching up a wound hurts, repositioning a broken arm to set it in plaster hurts, so if the kids says no to those because it hurts then why do parents routinely still make these kinds of decision for their kids? Obviously, short term pain and long term benefit to the child's health. Chemo is harsher than disinfecting a grazed knee, I'll grant you, but there are some brilliant anti-emetics available, as well as other drugs to help counteract the side effects of chemo...so it is managable. So if treatment lets the child live, then why would treatment be denied the child?
Chemo very often doesn't cure.
Actually, it very often does. And in a general sense, children with cancer have a higher rate of survival than adults with cancer.
Long-term follow-up shows they often get various cancers and other diseases decades later.
At least they have later decades. Right?
If chemo was a certain cure, then it's a different situation.
As I said previously, I don't know the type of cancer/cure rates in this case, but I would imagine that for no treatment we're talking 100% chance of death. So you're saying you'd choose 100% chance of the child's death, over and above something that cannot offer 100% chance of the child's cure?  | |
|
| Hamilton boy with cancer forced to undergo chemo
Posted: 5/19/2008 8:32:47 AM | Choosing a cancer treatment is a very complex, difficult decision.
Froggy and forks are pretty simple, at least for me. Are you struggling with those decisions?
Which cancer the kid has is irrelevant. The point being discussed is that whether the state can remove the kid the parents and force the kid into treatment. | |
|
| Hamilton boy with cancer forced to undergo chemo
Posted: 5/19/2008 8:51:25 AM |
Froggy and forks are pretty simple, at least for me. Are you struggling with those decisions?
My examples were in relation to a previous comment that a parent should be able to do what they like with children as long as they weren't physically abusing them. The point I was illustrating was simply that allowing a child to remain in danger when intervention would assist the child to be well/alive is not my idea of good parenting. This parallels to allowing a child to remain untreated for cancer.
Which cancer the kid has is irrelevant. The point being discussed is that whether the state can remove the kid the parents and force the kid into treatment.
I disagree only because I believe the relevance comes in when considering the likelihood of cure. Parents deciding that harsh treatment for a minimal chance of cure is not a good option would, to me, be more understandable than parents deciding that harsh treatment for a high chance of cure is not a good option. I simply don't believe a parent's rights extend to letting their child die if there is an alternative. It seems natural to me to intervene in a situation where parents were doing just that. | |
|
| Hamilton boy with cancer forced to undergo chemo
Posted: 5/19/2008 10:21:10 AM | Take him away from his moron parents and give him his treatment. Educate his moron parents about science.
I swear to God, people need to have a license and certification before they have kids. I would fully support this measure. So many ignorant putzes just hump away and out pops a kid and now 2 total idiots who arent fit to serve a burger at Harveys are raising a human being.
God help that kid.
The state has COMPLETE authority in protecting children from putz parents. Some examples;
a. the Chinese have a method of treating illness called chasing the yin which involves burning the skin on the arm with coins...should the state intervene?
b. if you see evidence of bruising on a childs arms and chest, suggesting abuse, do you report this to the authorities?
c. if a child is not in car seat with a seat belt, do you enforce the law by charging the parents?
The state protects the elderly and the very young from abuse. Refusing medical treatment is a form of abuse. It might be well intentioned, but then so is chasing the yin. | |
|
| Hamilton boy with cancer forced to undergo chemo
Posted: 5/19/2008 3:24:36 PM | Chemo makes the body toxic, and destroys the immune system. When the immune system is drained, you die.
Its a miracle anyone can survive chemo and radiation... and for the ones who do survive these "treatments", I wonder if they would have survived had they NOT HAD any treatment at all.
Chemo is best described as a war between the cancer and the doctor, with the patient as the battleground, and should not be forced on children.
**I've seen reports of doctors, who if they had cancer, 75% of them would not take chemo. Now, what does that tell ya? | |
|
| |
| Hamilton boy with cancer forced to undergo chemo
Posted: 5/19/2008 7:03:05 PM | this is just another example of the drs and government dictating to us how we should live our lives and who is in control of things
there is no cure for cancer, yet
chemotherapy isnt a cure and in most cases just destroys the persons quality of life that he has remaining
realistically i think it should be the choice of the person , regardless of the age, and when it is accepted and backed up by the will of the childs parents , i think that is the end of the discussion
noone else has the right to make someone suffer unduly in a life which is not of their choosing, they have a disease, the natural end of which is death, we are all suffering from the exact same disease which is called life, the end result is death as well.
if we werent all so afraid of death and trying so hard to steal one more moment of life from it , we would enjoy what lives we really have
what gives another person the right to say what is right for another human? especially when it is his own self determination, i dont see anyone going door to door dictating to addicts or junkies and forcing them to undergo therapy or treatment for their willingly committing slow suicide , so i say let the child and his parents live as they choose, they arent hurting anyone and being oldenough and mature enough to have a terminal disease also allows him the right to self determine how he ends his life. it isnt suicide by dying naturally of an incurable disease so just let him and his parents acceot and deal with the result in the best way they can | |
|
| Hamilton boy with cancer forced to undergo chemo
Posted: 5/20/2008 1:33:00 AM |
there is no cure for cancer, yet
I don't know why people insist on saying cancer can't be cured...that's such a sweeping generalisation. There are hundreds of types of cancer and many of them have high cure rates. Yes, some types of cancer will get you, and some will come back and get you in the end...but others, many types, they can very effectively banish for good.
I know a couple of people who survived cancer thanks to chemo/radiation (eg: are well past the 5 year mark with no reappearance of cancer, including two who had breast cancer, two who had ovarian cancer, and one who had bowel cancer) One of my uncles is now 10 years on as a result of medically based treatments including chemo and radiotherapy and he's as happy and healthy as a horse. That's ten years he wouldn't have had otherwise...almost as much as the total sum of this poor kid's life so far.
As I also posted in another thread...the rate of cure is improving. Now this is a sweeping statistic incorporating all types of cancers (the ones considered highly curable and the ones they consider unbeatable.) In the 30's ...25% of people were still alive 5 years after diagnosis. Toward the end of the 80's...40% of people were still alive 5 years after diagnosis. (source: How We Die, Sherwin Nuland, 1998.) That's a vast improvement in the odds....and if you get into the specifics of each type of cancer, some have waaaay better odds again. Why would you not give your child a shot at a longer life? The kid is only 11...bit young to say it's time to accept his natural death isn't it?
I've seen reports of doctors, who if they had cancer, 75% of them would not take chemo. Now, what does that tell ya?
Would you be able to quote your source, as I find this somewhat surprising. I have spent a lot of time around oncology wards and the doctors I have talked to have all said they would take chemo/radiotherapy...all except one...and he was specifically talking about not bothering to accept treatment for adenocarcinoma in the head of the pancreas, which pretty much has a zero cure rate anyway. | |
|
| Hamilton boy with cancer forced to undergo chemo
Posted: 5/20/2008 6:44:46 AM | Do you know how Chemo works ? Do you know what radiation does to you body ? why do you think when your getting your teeth x-rayed your covered with a protective guard. If you think its so great then next time tell them not to use that everytime you get a picture taken.
The effects on your body are not good at all. Sure it MIGHT slow it down but it will not cure it. The boy is only 11yrs old and the long term effects on his still growing body will be greatly effected. It may not have bothered the already matured adult.
There are alot of natural more effective ways of battling Cancer. All you have to do is look them up. I have talked with the Father of that boy, he has gone the natural path and was using some silver drinks and some gold drink i think he said. There are other things they were doing but from what he said the Cancer was in remission from this. Since they made the boy go back to Chemo he has gotten worse. The other treatmeats they using was helping the boy alot and he was coming alot great he said. Now not so good at all he barely has the strength to wave at his father and your telling me Chemo is the answer for a 11yr old boy who still developing? | |
|
| Hamilton boy with cancer forced to undergo chemo
Posted: 5/20/2008 8:18:28 AM |
have talked with the Father of that boy
Could you satisfy my curiosity and let me know what type of cancer the boy has?
Do you know how Chemo works ? Do you know what radiation does to you body ?
Yes. I do actually. Do you know of the advancements made in recent decades to both the accuracy of treatments and solutions for side effects and survival rates? (80% of kids survive to adulthood after medically based treatments) In contrast, do you understand how permanent and incurable death is?
he has gone the natural path and was using some silver drinks and some gold drink i think he said. There are other things they were doing but from what he said the Cancer was in remission from this.
That sounds kinda vague. Did scans/tests confirm the remission? It is highly unusual for doctors to administer chemo to a person who is in remission, so it indicates that they did not believe this to be the case. ??
Since they made the boy go back to Chemo he has gotten worse. The other treatmeats they using was helping the boy alot and he was coming alot great he said. Now not so good at all he barely has the strength to wave at his father
The other treatment might have made him feel good, but people can feel great with cancer even as it spreads through them. You seem to assume that I think chemo doesn't have any side effects, but as I said earlier...the short term and long term have to be weighed up by doctors with the appropriate medical knowledge. He will get his strength back. | |
|
| Hamilton boy with cancer forced to undergo chemo
Posted: 5/20/2008 8:42:42 AM | ^^^ Edit: I googled.
He has Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia . The overall cure rate in children is 85%, and about 50% of adults have long-term disease-free survival 'Acute' refers to the undifferentiated, immature state of the circulating lymphocytes ("blasts"), and to the rapid progression of disease, which can be fatal in weeks to months if left untreated.
It's a very sad story. | |
|
| Hamilton boy with cancer forced to undergo chemo
Posted: 5/20/2008 2:15:39 PM | "overall cure rate in children is 85%"
That's a very high cure rate for any cancer. Testicular cancer (Lance Armstrong) cure tate is 95%. He was extremely lucky because he had metastatic disease. The lung and pancreatic cancer (Pat Swaze, Pavarotti) 5-year mortality rate is over 90%.
Even if cured of pediatric leukemia, QoL and chemo-caused diseases are serious for kids:
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/428518
Most decisions about cancer treatment are extremely complex and difficult for adults, and totally beyond a child. The parents should decide, "It's Their Kid", not institutions.
Deciding against chemo does not define the parents a fncking putzes, except by @ssholes. | |
|
| Hamilton boy with cancer forced to undergo chemo
Posted: 5/21/2008 6:16:00 AM | | From the way you speak so easily about putting a child through those kinds of treatments i can only come to the conclusion that you, yourself do not have childern of your own. So you could not understand what its like to see your own child suffer by the hands of another. Especially when its being forced. | |
|
| Hamilton boy with cancer forced to undergo chemo
Posted: 5/21/2008 8:36:30 AM | There are cures for cancer available that do not involve the use of chemo or radiation. A first hand experience I can speak of is that my uncle had mesothelioma (lung cancer from asbestos). His doctor sent him home to die & we (my family & I) went to work on him & he was declared cancer free within 6 months. The doctors were blown away.
I have made solid (benign so far) tumors disappear completely inside my own body. The breast oncologists at UAMS (an international leader in cancer treatments) were blown away & took down a list of the things I used to do it. The doc I was seeing said she wanted to do some additional research on those substances & I guess she has been. The last time I went in, she asked if I was still using that stuff. | |
|
| |
| Hamilton boy with cancer forced to undergo chemo
Posted: 5/21/2008 10:43:02 AM | | We got my Uncle's diet cleaned up & used several vitamins, herbs, & nutritional supplements. It was rigorous, but it worked. The specifics would be lengthy to post, but if you wish to find out all of that, you may contact me via my profile. I would have to go back through my notes to give a complete picture. Some I could scatch off the top of my head, but others would require going into my notes. I'm at work (slow day) right now so I'm not able to do anything about the notes right now. | |
|
| Hamilton boy with cancer forced to undergo chemo
Posted: 5/21/2008 12:09:14 PM | | Ok question for you, now if you had childern and one of them had Cancer. You would use the treatment to put the cancer in remission right? So now your doing this but your Dr orders Chemo on your child do you follow him or do you continue with what your doing...knowing that CAS could step in and force Chemo .... | |
|
| Hamilton boy with cancer forced to undergo chemo
Posted: 5/22/2008 10:19:24 AM | The state is absolutely doing the right thing here. It's not your choice to let your child die because you have a problem with the treatment offered.
Now if he's 18 and decides that's what he wants it's a different story. Here, the parents do not get to decide that they'd rather let their child die, any more than they could decide they were not going to feed their child any longer and let him die that way.
What's the big moral dilemma here? | |
|
| Hamilton boy with cancer forced to undergo chemo
Posted: 5/22/2008 2:07:13 PM | If I or a child (I was unable to have children) that I might have came up with cancer of any sort, I would do the things I Know will work without destroying the body with chemo or radiation. I have seen the stats on success rates on various treatments & chemo & radiation don't really have numbers that are all that great overall. Some forms are more treatable via those methods than others, but overall the numbers are not good. In some forms of cancer, chemo & radiation have a whopping ZERO better chance of survival than NOT using it. Meanwhile, the body's immune system is destroyed in the process. IF I was FORCED by the state to subject my child to such barbaric treatments, I would certainly do all that I know about to diminish the damage it would cause & to ease the suffering of my child's pain with complimentary alternatives.
Many years ago a friend of mine had to go to a public hospital in New Orleans to birth her son. She had been trained in natural birthing methods & was working on her breathing techniques. The attending staff held her nose to make her stop & threatened that if she did not cease, they would take her child into state custody & she would never see him again. They told her that what she was doing was child abuse & they would not stand for it! LOL So much for allopathic medicine for having all the right answers! | |
|
| Hamilton boy with cancer forced to undergo chemo
Posted: 5/23/2008 11:52:15 PM | | I think in this case the government did the right thing. What's the difference between this, and the people of certain religions not allowing blood transfusions for their children? The child is only mimicking his parents. He's far too young to really understand all the medical jargon etc. Are these parents experts on the disease and the medical treatment, or are they just trying to avoid watching their child not feel well due to the treatment? I have experience with two people who have gone the 'natural' route for cancer treatment. The first is my dad. He has had prostate cancer for almost 15 years now. He did extensive research on the topic, and discovered that most men die with it, not because of it, so he decided to go the natural route. He has been on a vegetarian diet, and several strict, daily treatments ever since. Is he cured? No, and the last couple of years have been hard on him. He has suffered a lot of pain, and has now gone for some radiation, and is taking some estrogen treatments. It's been very hard on my mom. The second person was one of my aunts, my mom's older sister to be exact. She was always in to the natrual therapies, and health food etc., and was a very intelligent woman who lived a healthy life style. One day her legs gave out on her and she fell down a flight of stairs. She went to the doctor, one thing led to another, they did x-rays, and found she had spinal cancer. She also went the natural route. Being a research librarian all her life she tracked down every possible natural cure, and tried her best to beat it, but in the end she died a slow, painful death. On the other hand, I know other men who have had surgery and other conventional medical treatments for prostate cancer, and live a good life today. I also know people who have gone for chemo for other cancers, and lived to tell the tale for a long time after. I really think it comes down to the type of cancer. I think some cancers are too aggressive for natural cures to work because they tend to take a lot longer to take affect. I think if the government doesn't step in in the case of a child then they may set a dangerous precedent for future cases. | |
|
| Hamilton boy with cancer forced to undergo chemo
Posted: 5/24/2008 4:19:27 AM | ^^^ Great post Galway Girl. (And Noorct earlier...nicely summed up)
Some people are very quick to speak of the failings of orthodox medicine, and yet seem to be more than able to overlook the failure rate of alternative therapies. Of course it's easy to overlook when those who are promoting the natural therapies are hardly forthcoming about their failure rates. The woman down the road from me used natural therapies for her kidney cancer, and died pretty quickly....I'll bet those folk who convinced her that it would cure her aren't shouting about her outcome from the rafters. A different woman down the road had ovarian cancer and had radiation (not sure if she had chemo too) and is fine now.
Sure, anecdotal evidence abounds about anonymous people who drank some special drink and beat cancer, or tried some miracle natural cure that "doctors don't want you to know about" and survived...but anecdotal evidence is easy to make up on the spot. Most are unwilling to subject their 'cure' to standardised tests in order to collate some real data. In contrast, there is statistical data about the cure rates of orthodox medicine (which are pretty good for some types of cancer and I myself have 4 people quite close to me who are alive to praise chemo/radiation for the longevity it gave them) and yet it is dismissed as not curing anyone. ???
It's harder to ignore the high profile people....Steve MacQueen was held up as the poster boy for some non orthodox treatment, until he died from his cancer, then the mob promoting that particular treatment suddenly stopped mentioning that he'd even tried it. Years later Barry Sheene went the same path, and died. Andy Kaufman was diagnosed with inoperable cancer, he sought out alternative therapies. He even flew to the Philippines to receive psychic surgery. These treatments wasted time he could have spent with his family before he died. Doug Henning (magician) abandoned his career to devote all his time to studying Transcendental Meditation, which he thought would allow him to levitate. When he died of liver cancer, TM people claimed he was cancer free. The widow of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and a respected civil rights leader herself, was diagnosed with ovarian cancer, and sought out alternative therapies from a clinic in Mexico. She died there of complications. Bob Marley was diagnosed with malignant melanoma in his right big toe. His Rastafarian religious beliefs did not allow for amputation. He sought alternative therapies as the cancer spread to the rest of his body. He died. Sarah Parkinson (actress) was diagnosed with breast cancer, and was concerned that chemotherapy would prevent her from using IVF to start a family. Instead she used acupuncture, spiritual healing, homeopathy and Johrei to treat it, and died.
Kylie Minogue, Delta Goodrem, Olivia Newton John, had chemo/radiation and are alive. So is my uncle, a woman I used to work for, and a young woman who works at my local vet surgery.
So, whilst chemo/radiation are far from 100% perfect, to say that everyone who goes alternative lives, and everyone who goes orthodox dies, is blatantly untrue.
And yeah...what right do parents have to let an 11 year old die based on some pie in the sky theory. | |
|
| Hamilton boy with cancer forced to undergo chemo
Posted: 5/24/2008 9:16:24 PM | I’ve been following this thread with interest, not so much for the cancer issue but for the state custody issue and the questions surrounding freedom of choice for children and their parents. I have 4 kids of my own and the thought of the state taking control of their lives makes my blood boil…though not as much as the thought of them dieing would.
Although, having said that, and in response to
Most decisions about cancer treatment are extremely complex and difficult for adults, and totally beyond a child. The parents should decide, "It's Their Kid", not institutions.
I believe that child rearing is also a community responsibility and since our community includes our form of government then if a parent is making a poor decision perhaps the community/state should step in.
The biggest problem I have with the father’s decision is that he claims it’s his son’s choice to not have chemo (well that’s what all the news articles say) if this is the case then he obviously has no idea about what stage of development his son is at. Kids of that age nearly always agree with, and have the same beliefs as their parents. If the boy was 13 or 14 he would probably want the exact opposite to what his parents suggest…cos that’s what teenagers do.
This may sound harsh but personally I think the father is using the line that it’s his son’s choice to justify his own inability to see his child suffer during the treatment and, if and when his son dies he’ll be able to say it was his sons choice.
As for the cancer issue and choice of treatment I only have anecdotal evidence and the little that I have read to comment on. I have a friend who chose chemo to treat Hodgkin’s disease and went into remission for 5 years; he then required more treatment and has since been in remission for 4 years. I also have a close friend who had breast cancer and chose a strict diet and a rigorous course of alternative treatment and to the bewilderment of her doctors the cancer shrank and she’s been in remission for 3 years.
If I were in the position of the father I would be researching and considering all forms of treatment and possibly using a combination of both, but in the end I think this would be the clincher for me;
<div class='quote'>He has Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia . The overall cure rate in children is 85%, and about 50% of adults have long-term disease-free survival 'Acute' refers to the undifferentiated, immature state of the circulating lymphocytes ("blasts"), and to the rapid progression of disease, which can be fatal in weeks to months if left untreated.
85% seems like damn good odds to me. | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
