Mother On the Lam For Right to Let Son Die

[Shogun]

I think the main difference with Shaivo is her age, and that of her guardian, versus the age of the kid who, it seems, believes the same as the mother.


Do you believe in the right to die, Jillian?

No. The difference is the purpose. The purpose in pulling the plug on Schiavo was to kill her. That is unacceptable.

The purpose behind this kid is they don't want to mess with chemo, which comes with problems of its own and is no guarantee he'll live. And if he doesn't, he IS guaranteed pain, suffering, and misery for the last months of his life.

I disagree. The purpose of pulling Schaivo's plug was to let her die in dignity rather than remain a life support guinnea pig for as long as it took her PARENTS to finally let go.

And, baba, many cancer patients.. while not having a guarentee to live, get better with chemo and other assorted medical methods. Would you be similarly approving if a mother with AIDS passed along her AIDS to her newborn because she refused to take AIDS meds that would prohibit passing the virus on to the child?

If the kid wants the right to die with dignity then so be it. But let's not pretend that modern medicine is less effective than some bullshit native american CREME.

 

[Zoom-boing]

so if they claim their religion requires they tie the kid down and sacrifice him, that's ok by you?

Relgion while to be respected, doesn't give you carte blanche to let your kids die.

I'm still having trouble understanding why the same people who demanded that Terry Schiavo, with her liquified brain, be kept alive by machine, are fighting for this woman to kill her son.

... which btw, she has probably already done since he has gone from a 95% chance of cure to on his way to a 5% chance.

And you defend this?

I'm defending the parent's right to choose an alternative method of treatment. Were it me, I'd be doing both traditional and alternative. But it's not me and I don't believe the parent's are being negligent; they are opting for an alternative treatment. No I don't think they should be forced to go the chemo route if it goes against their beliefs.

you're defending them killing the kid because they SAY its their religious belief. But I've never known a Catholic who would refuse medicine on religious grounds.

if this were a chicken bone shaking voodoo mama would you be saying the same thing?

Again, why are the people who are defending this the same people who wouldn't let liquified brain Terry Schiavo go to her rest?

I'm serious.... I really don't understand.

No, I'm defending them being allowed to choose an alternative treatment. Yes he may die . . . or he may be cured. Yes the prognosis is very good with chemo but the parents want to pursue an alternative method. And that they are R.C., I'm sure they are praying. Is that bunk as well?

Catholicism doesn't forbid any kind of medical intervention but they also follow the Nemenhah Band that believes in natural healing methods.

The Hausers are Roman Catholic and also believe in the "do no harm" philosophy of the Nemenhah Band, a Missouri-based religious group that believes in natural healing methods advocated by some American Indians.
The Associated Press: Arrest ordered for mom of boy, 13, resisting chemo

But it's not a shaking voodoo mama, it's an alternative, natural method.

I've never said anything about Terry Schaivo, sorry.

Jillian, I've gone rounds and rounds with doctors with my son and they all 'knew what was best' and were all 'best in the field' and they offered what they knew, which were meds. BTDT. Know what worked best for my son's rampant behavioral problems? A four year gluten-free diet. I had docs scoff at me and call it hogwash . . . but altering his diet and incorporating various supplements helped more than meds. Yes, I'm aware this situation is different; just trying to explain my POV. I have no doubt that my personal experience with my son over the past 16 years colors my point of view.

 

[Shogun]

I think the main difference with Shaivo is her age, and that of her guardian, versus the age of the kid who, it seems, believes the same as the mother.


Do you believe in the right to die, Jillian?

If this were an adult making the decision to forego treatment, I might disagree, but they would have that right, IMO.

This kid hasn't a clue.

truuu.. and his age and ability to be influence is what keeps me on the fence here... But, do you believe that a thirteen year old girl is responsible enough to get an abortion?

 

[Shogun]

also, let me point out... we DO observe the jahova witness' perogative to REFUSE blood transfusions, yes? Even for children JWs?

 

[jillian]

I think the main difference with Shaivo is her age, and that of her guardian, versus the age of the kid who, it seems, believes the same as the mother.


Do you believe in the right to die, Jillian?

If this were an adult making the decision to forego treatment, I might disagree, but they would have that right, IMO.

This kid hasn't a clue.

truuu.. and his age and ability to be influence is what keeps me on the fence here... But, do you believe that a thirteen year old girl is responsible enough to get an abortion?

i understand WHY you're asking the question and trying to analogize, but I don't think it's a really good analogy because the circumstances are so different.

Kids have no sense of mortality. To them dying isn't concrete. It's why testosterone driven boy teens drive fast, do dangerous stupid things and never think anything will happen to them. This kid IS easily influenced. And from what I've read, this kid has little understanding of the beliefs system.

As for abortion, I sit on the fence because as a parent, I'd hope to be involved in any decision making process. But on the other hand, I don't believe government should micromanage relationships by forcing people to communicate with each other. And I don't want a kid NOT to terminate a pregnancy because she's afraid to go to her parents. And I'd rather see a 13 year old make the decision to terminate a pregnancy than make the decision to be a parent....

 

[AllieBaba]

The purpose of pulling Schiavo's plug was to claim life insurance money. And the ONLY person who wanted it was her husband (and his girlfried) who was under suspicion for being the CAUSE of her condition.

And if a mother refused AIDS meds because she feared the effect they would have on her kid and had reason to believe the child might only carry the HIV virus and not have actual AIDS at birth, and who hoped that before the child progressed a cure might be found, you bet I'd support that choice.

I've read up on Hodgkins, and the treatments are brutal. I know that with some cancers, the treatments aren't as horrible as they have been historically, and some suffer very few side effects. This isn't the case with Hodgkins, and in BEST CASE SCENARIOS (which no one has established this was) 1 out of 10 still die.

I've shared my story about letting my 13 year old opt to wean himself from his seizure meds. He was tired of medication which made him sick and lethargic, and I don't think your kid needs to be able to read for a mother's heart to sympathize with that. And there was a possibility we'd face some very horrible consequences. I was prepared to return to meds if they would give him quality of life, but as it turns out..HE NEVER HAD A SEIZURE AGAIN. At least not an obvious one. He was right.

I honestly wonder how Jill would respond if her boy who I think is roughly the age of this little boy, was in pain and begging her not to provide treatment. Particularly if the outlook was grim at the outset. Would she choose to force him to undergo painful treatment up until his death, or let him spend his time as he wished?

Provide some evidence that there were no mitigating factors and this kid was Stage I with an excellent prognosis. So far all I've heard are lies and generalities about how all kids with Hodgkins survive with treatment, and it's murder to deny it. That isn't the case at all, as thousands of parents with kids who have died from it can tell y ou.

 

[AllieBaba]

If this were an adult making the decision to forego treatment, I might disagree, but they would have that right, IMO.

This kid hasn't a clue.

truuu.. and his age and ability to be influence is what keeps me on the fence here... But, do you believe that a thirteen year old girl is responsible enough to get an abortion?

i understand WHY you're asking the question and trying to analogize, but I don't think it's a really good analogy because the circumstances are so different.

Kids have no sense of mortality. To them dying isn't concrete. It's why testosterone driven boy teens drive fast, do dangerous stupid things and never think anything will happen to them. This kid IS easily influenced. And from what I've read, this kid has little understanding of the beliefs system.

As for abortion, I sit on the fence because as a parent, I'd hope to be involved in any decision making process. But on the other hand, I don't believe government should micromanage relationships by forcing people to communicate with each other. And I don't want a kid NOT to terminate a pregnancy because she's afraid to go to her parents. And I'd rather see a 13 year old make the decision to terminate a pregnancy than make the decision to be a parent....

My kids have had a sense of morality since they were about 3 years old.

And any 13 year old who gets an abortion should be reported to child welfare by the abortion clinic at any rate, and the parents would be notified in order to be questioned about why the fuck their 12 year old daughter is having sex.

 

[del]

truuu.. and his age and ability to be influence is what keeps me on the fence here... But, do you believe that a thirteen year old girl is responsible enough to get an abortion?

i understand WHY you're asking the question and trying to analogize, but I don't think it's a really good analogy because the circumstances are so different.

Kids have no sense of mortality. To them dying isn't concrete. It's why testosterone driven boy teens drive fast, do dangerous stupid things and never think anything will happen to them. This kid IS easily influenced. And from what I've read, this kid has little understanding of the beliefs system.

As for abortion, I sit on the fence because as a parent, I'd hope to be involved in any decision making process. But on the other hand, I don't believe government should micromanage relationships by forcing people to communicate with each other. And I don't want a kid NOT to terminate a pregnancy because she's afraid to go to her parents. And I'd rather see a 13 year old make the decision to terminate a pregnancy than make the decision to be a parent....

My kids have had a sense of morality since they were about 3 years old.

And any 13 year old who gets an abortion should be reported to child welfare by the abortion clinic at any rate, and the parents would be notified in order to be questioned about why the fuck their 12 year old daughter is having sex.

it's probably hard to see from up there on your high horse so i bolded the relevant phrases for you.

and you're delusional if you think a 3 yr old has a sense of morality

 

[Shogun]

If this were an adult making the decision to forego treatment, I might disagree, but they would have that right, IMO.

This kid hasn't a clue.

truuu.. and his age and ability to be influence is what keeps me on the fence here... But, do you believe that a thirteen year old girl is responsible enough to get an abortion?

i understand WHY you're asking the question and trying to analogize, but I don't think it's a really good analogy because the circumstances are so different.

Kids have no sense of mortality. To them dying isn't concrete. It's why testosterone driven boy teens drive fast, do dangerous stupid things and never think anything will happen to them. This kid IS easily influenced. And from what I've read, this kid has little understanding of the beliefs system.

As for abortion, I sit on the fence because as a parent, I'd hope to be involved in any decision making process. But on the other hand, I don't believe government should micromanage relationships by forcing people to communicate with each other. And I don't want a kid NOT to terminate a pregnancy because she's afraid to go to her parents. And I'd rather see a 13 year old make the decision to terminate a pregnancy than make the decision to be a parent....

I understand where you are coming from about the abortion... but I think that it sets up massive holes in your logic here. I won't derail the thread but I don't think it's enough to say apples and oranges when, at the end of the day, the result is still a dead child. The same non-concrete impression of death applies to this kid as it does a thirteen year old girl and neither wants to be micro managed regarding health issues.


and... would't it be true that an abortion WOULD be had if the girl went to the mother and they both agreed to term the pregnancy? How would you say that parental perogative is different than the mother here? Again, im no fan of dogma junkies letting ignorance kill kids but... we do observe the jahova witness anti-blood transfusion, yes?

 

[AllieBaba]

Morality enough to know it's wrong to lie, that life is something to be valued, and not to hurt other, lesser beings. Which is more than I can say about most of the adult, elitist secular progressives.

 

[AllieBaba]

Jillian will say here that she thinks the parents of a 13 year old have the right to force their child to have an abortion.

 

[del]

Morality enough to know it's wrong to lie, that life is something to be valued, and not to hurt other, lesser beings. Which is more than I can say about most of the adult, elitist secular progressives.

more like if i lie or hit my little brother, mom's gonna go upside my head again.

the rest of it is hogwash.

 

[AllieBaba]

YOu've obviously never been around kids.

There are kids who will put kittens in the water bucket and watch them die (this was my nephew). THEY have no sense of morality. Kids who will encourage other kids to stick bobby pins into light sockets. (also my nephew).

Then there are kids, the same age, who will rescue said kittens. Those kids have a sense of morality. If they see a child doing something dangerous they will run to tell someone or try to help the kid.

It's a combination of innate personality and upbringing.

 

[jillian]

truuu.. and his age and ability to be influence is what keeps me on the fence here... But, do you believe that a thirteen year old girl is responsible enough to get an abortion?

i understand WHY you're asking the question and trying to analogize, but I don't think it's a really good analogy because the circumstances are so different.

Kids have no sense of mortality. To them dying isn't concrete. It's why testosterone driven boy teens drive fast, do dangerous stupid things and never think anything will happen to them. This kid IS easily influenced. And from what I've read, this kid has little understanding of the beliefs system.

As for abortion, I sit on the fence because as a parent, I'd hope to be involved in any decision making process. But on the other hand, I don't believe government should micromanage relationships by forcing people to communicate with each other. And I don't want a kid NOT to terminate a pregnancy because she's afraid to go to her parents. And I'd rather see a 13 year old make the decision to terminate a pregnancy than make the decision to be a parent....

I understand where you are coming from about the abortion... but I think that it sets up massive holes in your logic here. I won't derail the thread but I don't think it's enough to say apples and oranges when, at the end of the day, the result is still a dead child. The same non-concrete impression of death applies to this kid as it does a thirteen year old girl and neither wants to be micro managed regarding health issues.


and... would't it be true that an abortion WOULD be had if the girl went to the mother and they both agreed to term the pregnancy? How would you say that parental perogative is different than the mother here? Again, im no fan of dogma junkies letting ignorance kill kids but... we do observe the jahova witness anti-blood transfusion, yes?

If you want to discuss that issue in another thread... cue it up. But this one isn't about abortion.

It's about a mother who decided to kill her LIVING...born... NOT AN EMBROY... NOT A FETUS... but a living child.

 

[Shogun]

wow baba, you discovered the nature v nurture conundrum. I think you are shooting a bit wide of the target though.


and your take of the shiavo bit is a big steaming pile of shit. I bet the last person you'd want to see if someone in YOUR family was brain dead on life support would be sean hannity.

 

[AllieBaba]

Dishonest. She didn't decide to kill him. She chose a treatment that the press didn't like.

 

[AllieBaba]

wow baba, you discovered the nature v nurture conundrum. I think you are shooting a bit wide of the target though.


and your take of the shiavo bit is a big steaming pile of shit. I bet the last person you'd want to see if someone in YOUR family was brain dead on life support would be sean hannity.

When you can speak English and make sense, get back to me.

 

[Shogun]

i understand WHY you're asking the question and trying to analogize, but I don't think it's a really good analogy because the circumstances are so different.

Kids have no sense of mortality. To them dying isn't concrete. It's why testosterone driven boy teens drive fast, do dangerous stupid things and never think anything will happen to them. This kid IS easily influenced. And from what I've read, this kid has little understanding of the beliefs system.

As for abortion, I sit on the fence because as a parent, I'd hope to be involved in any decision making process. But on the other hand, I don't believe government should micromanage relationships by forcing people to communicate with each other. And I don't want a kid NOT to terminate a pregnancy because she's afraid to go to her parents. And I'd rather see a 13 year old make the decision to terminate a pregnancy than make the decision to be a parent....

I understand where you are coming from about the abortion... but I think that it sets up massive holes in your logic here. I won't derail the thread but I don't think it's enough to say apples and oranges when, at the end of the day, the result is still a dead child. The same non-concrete impression of death applies to this kid as it does a thirteen year old girl and neither wants to be micro managed regarding health issues.


and... would't it be true that an abortion WOULD be had if the girl went to the mother and they both agreed to term the pregnancy? How would you say that parental perogative is different than the mother here? Again, im no fan of dogma junkies letting ignorance kill kids but... we do observe the jahova witness anti-blood transfusion, yes?

If you want to discuss that issue in another thread... cue it up. But this one isn't about abortion.

It's about a mother who decided to kill her LIVING...born... NOT AN EMBROY... NOT A FETUS... but a living child.

I already said I wouldn't tangent this thread.... but your aversion to consistency looks like bird shot through tissue paper. It makes your whole position weak insomuch that you can't seem to offer a viable rebuttal or explanation.

 

[del]

YOu've obviously never been around kids.

There are kids who will put kittens in the water bucket and watch them die (this was my nephew). THEY have no sense of morality. Kids who will encourage other kids to stick bobby pins into light sockets. (also my nephew).

Then there are kids, the same age, who will rescue said kittens. Those kids have a sense of morality. If they see a child doing something dangerous they will run to tell someone or try to help the kid.

It's a combination of innate personality and upbringing.

yeah, i keep mine in a compound until they achieve their majority.


you're priceless. and i say that in the most effete, elite, progressive secular humanist way possible.

3 year old with a sense of morality. i gotta write that down.

 

[jillian]

I understand where you are coming from about the abortion... but I think that it sets up massive holes in your logic here. I won't derail the thread but I don't think it's enough to say apples and oranges when, at the end of the day, the result is still a dead child. The same non-concrete impression of death applies to this kid as it does a thirteen year old girl and neither wants to be micro managed regarding health issues.


and... would't it be true that an abortion WOULD be had if the girl went to the mother and they both agreed to term the pregnancy? How would you say that parental perogative is different than the mother here? Again, im no fan of dogma junkies letting ignorance kill kids but... we do observe the jahova witness anti-blood transfusion, yes?

If you want to discuss that issue in another thread... cue it up. But this one isn't about abortion.

It's about a mother who decided to kill her LIVING...born... NOT AN EMBROY... NOT A FETUS... but a living child.

I already said I wouldn't tangent this thread.... but your aversion to consistency looks like bird shot through tissue paper. It makes your whole position weak insomuch that you can't seem to offer a viable rebuttal or explanation.

You keep saying you don't want to derail the thread. Hmmmmmmmmmmm....

what are you, allie ijit who thinks everything is about abortion?

oh wait...right, it's about israel.

seriously, i'd be happy to discuss it, but i really haven't gotten any answers here.