Connecticut Supreme Court upholds ruling that teen must undergo chemo

[LumRaiderFan]

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2015/01/08/connecticut-supreme-court-upholds-ruling-that-teen-must-undergo-chemo/

[77]

But that same girl could get an abortion with or without parental consent!  we got problems!

[bullets13]

I'm fine with this. She has an 85% chance of survival, but has surely been brainwashed by her mom. If your kid got sick, the law does not allow you to take her out in the backyard and shoot her. This would've been essentially the same thing.

[77]

Its her choice how do you know her mom brainwashed her? Ive seen a lot of folks go thru treatment that makes them very very ill for a year or two only to die shortly there after.

[tvc184]

Its her choice how do you know her mom brainwashed her? Ive seen a lot of folks go thru treatment that makes them very very ill for a year or two only to die shortly there after.

 

No, it's not her choice. That age of medical decisions is 18. She is still a child in that state. When she turns 18, she can refuse anything. 

[PAMFAM10]

Maybe the kid need better parents. Your child has a curable illnesses and you go out and beyond to make sure she doesn't get it. ...I won't throw that man a life jacket....I'll just wait on GOD.

[tvc184]

Maybe the kid need better parents. Your child has a curable illnesses and you go out and beyond to make sure she doesn't get it. ...I won't throw that man a life jacket....I'll just wait on GOD.

 

It is common for people to scream constitutional rights. I agree that we have and should have those rights. It is only my opinion but maybe a majority of the public in many cases has no clue exactly what rights are and/or what the Supreme Court of the United States (or other courts) has said about them. 

 

In the religious area for example, a TX police officer wanted to wear a Christian Cross on his uniform. He was denied since jewelry is not permitted by department policy on uniforms. In other words an officer can't wear his Mason's emblem, the Boy Scout pin or anything else and that means religious symbols also. The department however (Arlington PD) allowed him to wear a ring or a necklace inside of his shirt since those were allowed by policy. It would have been wrong for the department to allow rings to be worn but not any Christian symbol. That would have been a violation of rights but they did not do that. They did not forbid him to display the Cross but only on his uniform shirt (hence the term "uniform" meaning all the same). He was fired and appealed. He lost the appeal and filed a federal lawsuit. He lost that and appealed to the 5th Circuit in New Orleans as the last step before the Supreme Court. They upheld the firing for insubordination and fail to follow rules. He lastly appealed to the Supreme Court and they rejected the appeal, allowing the 5th Circuit ruling to stand. 

 

That is merely an example but people will shout religious freedom having no clue as to what laws including case law issued by courts. It is like anything becomes legal if I just throw the word "religion", "Christian, "Jewish", etc., on front of the argument. I can't legally smoke cocaine because my Church of the Rock isn't talking about the Rock of Salvation or smoke marijuana because I attend the Church of the Holy Blunt. 

 

I think the duty of the parents and the state to protect a child goes beyond simply the parents wanting something. When she turns 18, she can make her own choice. When she is a child, I think it is abuse to deny reasonable medical care and allowing her to die does not seem like reasonable medical care. 

[LumRaiderFan]

No, it's not her choice. That age of medical decisions is 18. She is still a child in that state. When she turns 18, she can refuse anything. 

 

If I was a parent in this situation, I would do whatever it took to keep my child alive.

 

That seems to be what is missing here in this particular case.

 

TVC, how would they enforce this if the girl won't cooperate...can the state physically restrain her and force treatment.

 

Playing devil's advocate here...if this same girl killed someone in cold blood, couldn't the state determine that she acted as and can be tried as an adult, therefore capable of making adult decisions?

[jv_coach]

I am interested in knowing what the "alternative" methods for curing the cancer they wish to pursue?  

 

This sorta reminds me of Gandhi who would not let his wife take western medicine because it would corrupt the "spirits" but when he got sick then he found a new truth to meditate on. 

[bullets13]

Its her choice how do you know her mom brainwashed her? Ive seen a lot of folks go thru treatment that makes them very very ill for a year or two only to die shortly there after.

legally, it's not her choice. and the only reason I think her mom brainwashed her is because her mom is actually supporting her in this. Name any parent you know who would support their child's decision to die from cancer when Chemotherapy or radiation offered an 85% chance of cure. we're not talking about a case of using chemotherapy or radiation on a terminal case of cancer in an order to live an extra six months. we're talking about an almost 9 to 1 chance of survival.

[tvc184]

If I was a parent in this situation, I would do whatever it took to keep my child alive.

 

That seems to be what is missing here in this particular case.

 

TVC, how would they enforce this if the girl won't cooperate...can the state physically restrain her and force treatment.

 

 

 

Yes they can. 

 

 

Playing devil's advocate here...if this same girl killed someone in cold blood, couldn't the state determine that she acted as and can be tried as an adult, therefore capable of making adult decisions?

 

 

Yes they can. 

 

 

Civil and criminal are two different issues.