Amish Girl With Leukemia, Family Flees US to Avoid Chemotherapy

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

http://gma.yahoo.com/amish-girl-leukemia-family-flees-us-avoid-chemotherapy-140153559--abc-news-topstories.html?vp=1

Interesting. Here, in the terrible US medical system, a poor family with no insurance has to LEAVE the United States to PREVENT thier child from receiving expensive medical treatment.

Wait...I thought...oh, NM

I bet they went to Canada.

[mota bhai 2,675]

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

They're idiots.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

http://gma.yahoo.com/amish-girl-leukemia-family-flees-us-avoid-chemotherapy-140153559--abc-news-topstories.html?vp=1

Interesting. Here, in the terrible US medical system, a poor family with no insurance has to LEAVE the United States to PREVENT thier child from receiving expensive medical treatment.

Wait...I thought...oh, NM

I bet they went to Canada.

Wow I would hate to be the judge .So many sides to this. Freedom vs Common sense.Does the state have the right.? Is it child abuse.?

[Peikko 1,575]

Yes, it's considered child abuse, that was what the court case was designed to determine. If a parent knowingly puts a child in danger then that's abuse. Withholding treatment that has a very good track record and success rate for religious reasons is abusive when you know that by not getting the treatment the child will die. The best interests of the child are not being served. The child may or may not believe the same things as its parents as regards treatment but a child is by definition not considered competent to understand all the implications. I would understand the parent's point of view if the treatment was intolerable and the success rate low, but that is not the case. The success rate for this particular cancer and treatment is very good.

[lostinblue 1,989]

So this girl should not be allowed to make the decision if she should recieve treatment ? Why

[Novembro 1,763]

Ban Amish people.

[Peikko 1,575]

So this girl should not be allowed to make the decision if she should recieve treatment ? Why

She's a minor. It's not clear what her own opinion is. All we know is her parents do not want her to get life saving treatment. Not that they want to save their child from suffering, she will suffer because she will die and not a very nice death if she is not treated whereas if she is treated, the treatment is certainly unpleasant but there is an incredibly high success rate. I don't think many children would willingly choose the option to die outside of medical intervention, do you?

Ban Amish people.

Well no, the adults have the right to choose their own way of life, they know the consequences and if they want to choose to avoid modern medical interventions so be it.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

So this girl should not be allowed to make the decision if she should recieve treatment ? Why

For the same reason she shouldn't be exposed to drink and drugs.

Is that a serious question, for ####'s sake

[Novembro 1,763]

Well no, the adults have the right to choose their own way of life, they know the consequences and if they want to choose to avoid modern medical interventions so be it.

[mota bhai 2,675]

Unserious people rarely ask serious questions.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

There's a line between being genuinely stupid and acting stupid. I'm trying to decide what side of it some of these people are on!

[Peikko 1,575]

There's a line between being genuinely stupid and acting stupid. I'm trying to decide what side of it some of these people are on!

It's clear to me they sincerely believe the things they post. That what they believe rarely forms a coherent argument beyond, "it's bad because the govmint did it" is unlikely to be entirely due to stupidity

It's more likely a mixture of wishful thinking, for example somehow if you solve the problem of 'the poor' by ignoring their needs and eliminating government subsistence the US miraculously becomes a utopia and a failure to see people in dire circumstances as actual people, more two dimensional cutouts. Thus the poor become lazy good for nothings with no redeeming qualities. If you do not think of them as people then they are easy to dismiss.

In this instance, the govmint is evil because its interfering in a parent's right to choose to allow their child to die a painful death. The poster does not actually consider the child as a real person, just a 'victim' of government over extension. Absurd but there you are.

Edited November 29, 2013 by The Truth™

[lostinblue 1,989]

But she by law can buy and take a morning after pill correct ..... without a parents permission. .If she is mature enough for that decision,(according to the courts) she by rights should be mature enough to decide treatment..

[Peikko 1,575]

You do know she's 10? Are you seriously saying a 10 year old would be able to make that decision independently of her parent's influence? This will end badly. The girl will suffer and it will be the parent's fault. The courts are not going to pursue this, which is right, they have tried to intervene and do the right thing, the parents are taking extraordinary steps to evade a legal decision that is based on ensuring the child's best interests. This is not a case of government going too far, ti's a case of the law trying to ensure a 10 year old does not suffer unnecessarily.