wtf????? he can live...

[manifold]

the child has the right to have his or her voice heard and have a judge intervene TO SAVE HIS LIFE.

So I guess you're pro-life now.

 

[jillian]

the child has the right to have his or her voice heard and have a judge intervene TO SAVE HIS LIFE.

So I guess you're pro-life now.

I'm against child abuse.

 

[Seraega]

Lots of people who can live, die because of a lack of healthcare...why is it any worse when its a direct refusal by the parents as opposed to a direct refusal by the system?

Because abuse and neglect laws require that parents protect their children. Their children do not have the power to make decisions for themselves. In the face of parents who neglect their basic needs, the child has the right to have his or her voice heard and have a judge intervene TO SAVE HIS LIFE.

If it was HIM making the decision to die, that would be one thing. But these people are making that decision for him.

This is exactly right, while parents have the legal right to make decisions for their children, they must do so in good faith for the best interest of the child. If they're not doing that then they're guilty of nothing less than child abuse or neglect. The courts job is to consider these matters.

 

[AllieBaba]

And he might not be able to read for reasons you apparently haven't considered.

He has a learning disability, furthering my point that he is incapable of making an informed decision.

Or dyslexia. Or epilepsy. Or any of a half dozen other things, which don't indicate an inability to reason. Many doctors can barely read and write.

 

[AllieBaba]

Wow. I thought Ravi would be the one who came forward and would insist that the state step in if the kid didn't decide the "right" way. Whatever that is.

"Right way"? Don't you mean life or death? Because that's what it boils down to. Treatment means life; no treatment means death. I'm all for parent's rights and religious beliefs and all that. What I am against is blatant stupidity.

Then you must oppose abortion as well, since it's a matter of life or death.

 

[AllieBaba]

Lots of people who can live, die because of a lack of healthcare...why is it any worse when its a direct refusal by the parents as opposed to a direct refusal by the system?

Because abuse and neglect laws require that parents protect their children. Their children do not have the power to make decisions for themselves. In the face of parents who neglect their basic needs, the child has the right to have his or her voice heard and have a judge intervene TO SAVE HIS LIFE.

If it was HIM making the decision to die, that would be one thing. But these people are making that decision for him.

This is exactly right, while parents have the legal right to make decisions for their children, they must do so in good faith for the best interest of the child. If they're not doing that then they're guilty of nothing less than child abuse or neglect. The courts job is to consider these matters.

Sure. So the court forces him to undergo painful chemo treatment and he dies anyway. So it wouldn't have made any difference if the parents had had their way, except he wouldn't have had to suffer through poison being injected into him regularly.

 

[strollingbones]

chemo is painfull....chemo saves lives....

 

[AllieBaba]

But not all lives.

 

[Ravi]

Wow. I thought Ravi would be the one who came forward and would insist that the state step in if the kid didn't decide the "right" way. Whatever that is.

It sounds more and more like his parents are retarded. wtf he can't read at 13?

To me this is not much different than starving a child to death...trying to deny him this treatment. His parents are fucking assholes.

 

[AllieBaba]

Hello. Have you heard of dyslexia? You must have because I swear you have it sometimes. Have you read any of the previous posts?

 

[AllieBaba]

At any rate, I knew that if there was any chance the child might side with his parents on this, you would be for forcing treatment on him anyway. That's what a good Nazi does. They force people to do things they don't want to.

 

[random3434]

All I know is if my 13 yo daughter had cancer, I would fight tooth and nail to get her the most effective treatment out there so she could have a chance to grow up.

A dear friend of mine is going through chemo right now, and no, it's not pretty. It's painful and her hair and eyelashes have fallen out. But she's fighting for her life so she can raise her 2 year old son, and maybe one day have another child with her loving husband.


Do you think if the chemo works, and this boy gets to grow up into adulthood like we all did, the parents are going to be pissed that the judge made them get chemo for him?

 

[Ravi]

Hello. Have you heard of dyslexia? You must have because I swear you have it sometimes. Have you read any of the previous posts?

Unless the kid is retarded a learning disability more than likely would not prevent him from learning to read.

Unless the dimwit parents prayed over that as well instead of getting him help.

So Babble, if they thought space aliens would save the boy would you still feel the same way.

 

[Ravi]

At any rate, I knew that if there was any chance the child might side with his parents on this, you would be for forcing treatment on him anyway. That's what a good Nazi does. They force people to do things they don't want to.

I'd want a child psychologist to evaluate him if that were the case.

I understand the slippery slope ramifications of this case.

But the fact of the matter is that every living, breathing human deserves basic human rights even if their parents strive to deny them.

 

[Ravi]

All I know is if my 13 yo daughter had cancer, I would fight tooth and nail to get her the most effective treatment out there so she could have a chance to grow up.

A dear friend of mine is going through chemo right now, and no, it's not pretty. It's painful and her hair and eyelashes have fallen out. But she's fighting for her life so she can raise her 2 year old son, and maybe one day have another child with her loving husband.


Do you think if the chemo works, and this boy gets to grow up into adulthood like we all did, the parents are going to be pissed that the judge made them get chemo for him?

More than likely the kid is going to wonder why his parents wanted him dead.

 

[AllieBaba]

Sure. But if it DOESN'T work, then he was forced to suffer for nothing, the parents' rights were removed for nothing, and the chances of someone having their freedom taken from them because they don't hook up to an "approved" treatment is increased.

I have a child with epilepsy. He had partial focal, projectile vomiting, drop attacks, and petit mal (absence)seizures. He was taking huge doses of depakote for more than a year, after messing with medication that didn't work and actually made him worse.

When he was 13 he told me he'd had it with the meds. He didn't want to take them anymore. Now if you know anything about epilepsy, you know it's DANGEROUS. Drop attacks are the worst because they're so sudden, can happen at any time. Ppl who have that sort of seizure aren't allowed to get licenses, have to wear helmets...it's horrible. Absence seizures affect learning because a kid might only hear every other syllable coming out of a teacher's mouth...but you can't tell to look at them that anything is going on.

Anyway, he decided at 13 he was done with it. He hated the pills, hated going to the doctor, hated it all.

So we weaned him off. And he hasn't had a visible seizure since. Has had to deal with some anxiety issues that I think are related to the epilepsy but he recognizes that and is a wonderful man and father to his baby....

People have a right to decide what is right for them. If Ravi had seen the seizures my boy had, the staggering in circles, eyes rolling up in his head, running into walls, falling, and the difficulties he had with comprehension because of the other seizures, she would be all for terminating my parental rights for doing what I did, removing my boy from custody and forcing him to take depakote until his teeth rotted out of his head and his liver quit functioning.

Or we might have stopped the depakote and he could have gone into status epileticus....a constant seizure. And at that point we would have made the decision whether to medicate the crap out of him and hope he didn't die anyway, or let him go.

At any rate, it would be our choice. Families get to make those sorts of decisions. Unless someone can prove that a family IS being negligent or actually harmful, I think the family's decision should be honored. If there's no evidence that there have been past incidents of neglect or abuse, this is their choice.

And the fact that he's not able to read tells me there are other issues here that are influencing the family. Maybe he has brain damage, maybe his health in other respects is poor, maybe he's NOT A GOOD CANDIDATE FOR CHEMO.

 

[Valerie]

Unless someone can prove that a family IS being negligent or actually harmful, I think the family's decision should be honored. If there's no evidence that there have been [past] incidents of neglect or abuse, this is their choice.

I agree. In this case it was proven to be harmful and negligent.

 

[AllieBaba]

Hello. Have you heard of dyslexia? You must have because I swear you have it sometimes. Have you read any of the previous posts?

Unless the kid is retarded a learning disability more than likely would not prevent him from learning to read.

Unless the dimwit parents prayed over that as well instead of getting him help.

So Babble, if they thought space aliens would save the boy would you still feel the same way.

Per usual, showing off your ignorance.

DYSLEXIA. People with DYSLEXIA cannot read, and are NOT retarded. My boy still hates to read because of the fact that READING TRIGGERED SEIZURES when he was young, and he's CERTAINLY not retarded.

People with certain brain dysfunction can't read but aren't retarded...my nephew ran into a telephone pole when he was a kid and for two days could only see print on one side of a newspaper. He's gifted. If the damage had been permanent, he'd remain gifted, but unable to read.

Good grief you're such an ignoramus, and yet you want to dictate to people how to treat their illnesses? LOTS OF PEOPLE WHO AREN'T RETARDED CAN'T READ, idiota.

 

[Ravi]

Sure. But if it DOESN'T work, then he was forced to suffer for nothing, the parents' rights were removed for nothing, and the chances of someone having their freedom taken from them because they don't hook up to an "approved" treatment is increased.

I have a child with epilepsy. He had partial focal, projectile vomiting, drop attacks, and petit mal (absence)seizures. He was taking huge doses of depakote for more than a year, after messing with medication that didn't work and actually made him worse.

When he was 13 he told me he'd had it with the meds. He didn't want to take them anymore. Now if you know anything about epilepsy, you know it's DANGEROUS. Drop attacks are the worst because they're so sudden, can happen at any time. Ppl who have that sort of seizure aren't allowed to get licenses, have to wear helmets...it's horrible. Absence seizures affect learning because a kid might only hear every other syllable coming out of a teacher's mouth...but you can't tell to look at them that anything is going on.

Anyway, he decided at 13 he was done with it. He hated the pills, hated going to the doctor, hated it all.

So we weaned him off. And he hasn't had a visible seizure since. Has had to deal with some anxiety issues that I think are related to the epilepsy but he recognizes that and is a wonderful man and father to his baby....

People have a right to decide what is right for them. If Ravi had seen the seizures my boy had, the staggering in circles, eyes rolling up in his head, running into walls, falling, and the difficulties he had with comprehension because of the other seizures, she would be all for terminating my parental rights for doing what I did, removing my boy from custody and forcing him to take depakote until his teeth rotted out of his head and his liver quit functioning.

Or we might have stopped the depakote and he could have gone into status epileticus....a constant seizure. And at that point we would have made the decision whether to medicate the crap out of him and hope he didn't die anyway, or let him go.

At any rate, it would be our choice. Families get to make those sorts of decisions. Unless someone can prove that a family IS being negligent or actually harmful, I think the family's decision should be honored. If there's no evidence that there have been past incidents of neglect or abuse, this is their choice.

And the fact that he's not able to read tells me there are other issues here that are influencing the family. Maybe he has brain damage, maybe his health in other respects is poor, maybe he's NOT A GOOD CANDIDATE FOR CHEMO.

If what you've posted is the truth, you had your son's best interests at heart. In the case of this boy with leukemia, the parents had the best interests of their idealized version of God at heart.

Big difference.

But keep pretending you know what I think, Babble.

 

[Ravi]

Hello. Have you heard of dyslexia? You must have because I swear you have it sometimes. Have you read any of the previous posts?

Unless the kid is retarded a learning disability more than likely would not prevent him from learning to read.

Unless the dimwit parents prayed over that as well instead of getting him help.

So Babble, if they thought space aliens would save the boy would you still feel the same way.

Per usual, showing off your ignorance.

DYSLEXIA. People with DYSLEXIA cannot read, and are NOT retarded. My boy still hates to read because of the fact that READING TRIGGERED SEIZURES when he was young, and he's CERTAINLY not retarded.

People with certain brain dysfunction can't read but aren't retarded...my nephew ran into a telephone pole when he was a kid and for two days could only see print on one side of a newspaper. He's gifted. If the damage had been permanent, he'd remain gifted, but unable to read.

Good grief you're such an ignoramus, and yet you want to dictate to people how to treat their illnesses? LOTS OF PEOPLE WHO AREN'T RETARDED CAN'T READ, idiota.

LOL! You are the biggest koolaid drinker I've run across. Lots of people, if not all, that are dyslexic can learn to read. Unless their idiot parents refuse to get them help or help them theirselves.