Page 8 of 15 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 142

Thread: Arrest ordered for mom of boy, 13, resisting chemo

  1. #71
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-06-09 @ 03:03 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    11,946

    Re: Arrest ordered for mom of boy, 13, resisting chemo

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Because Darwin's theory does not work quite like that as I understand it.
    I was joking around

  2. #72
    Pragmatist
    SouthernDemocrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    KC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,410

    Re: Arrest ordered for mom of boy, 13, resisting chemo

    Quote Originally Posted by Felicity View Post
    If he were a girl, he could get an abortion without any one's consent.
    Oh ok, since Stalin got away with murdering 20 Million people, then Hitler should have gotten away with it to then.

    Injustices do not excuse other injustices.

    His parent's could secure a loan/line of credit--his parents support choosing not to treat.
    His parents could not secure a line of credit and then make their child liable for it. If they did so, they would be breaking the law.

    Parents can home-school--his parents support choosing not to treat.
    You still have to reach the same assessment levels that public and private schooled kids have to reach.

    The parents could choose their child's hospital too, but they cannot deny them life saving treatment.


    Parents can choose to let the kid have alcohol in their own home,--his parents support choosing not to treat.
    Thats an even more absurd example than the others. However, if your kid was getting drunk regularly, and you were leaving alcohol around easily accessible to them, then the authorities could get involved as well.

    Parents can buy a gun and supervise firearm instruction--his parents support choosing not to treat.
    Parents can choose their kids doctor too. What is your point there?

    His parents are his guardian!
    Yes, exactly, as in he is a ward of his parents. He is not their property though. They do not own him. They are entrusted with his care. That is why you can lose your custody due to abuse or neglect.

    So--some people are too blind to drive.
    Thats a stupid example.

    With his parents guidance, yes. Do I agree that his parents are doing the right thing? NO--but they are free to be wrong.
    Yes, you are free to make bad decisions as a parent so long as your bad decisions do not grossly endanger the life of your child.

    My knee jerk reaction WAS get that fool kid to the doctors stupid parents! But I considered what my own freedom means to me and changed my mind.
    Freedom applies to you as the individual. You are not free to condemn your kids to an agonizing death just because you are an ignorant lunatic.

    Frankly, I don't get this. I can't imagine how anyone, especially a parent (I dont know if you are or are not), could hold the opinion you have on this. Usually I can see the merits of the arguments of those I disagree with, but in this case, to be honest, I don't see any merit to your argument at all. I just think its dangerous and absurd. I am just glad that the vast majority of Americans would disagree with you on this.
    "You're the only person that decides how far you'll go and what you're capable of." - Ben Saunders (Explorer and Endurance Athlete)

  3. #73
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:12 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,328
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Arrest ordered for mom of boy, 13, resisting chemo

    Quote Originally Posted by Felicity View Post
    I was joking around
    In that case, I am generally all in favor of the "evolution in action" concept. I got in some trouble up here recently. A teenage kid was walking on some railroad tracks, listening to an MP3 player with headphones on, so did not hear the train that ended up hitting and killing him. People where talking about what a tragedy, I was talking about weeding out some one so stupid he should not breed.

    I did at least keep my comments private so there was no chance of the family hearing. I am not totally heartless.

  4. #74
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-06-09 @ 03:03 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    11,946

    Re: Arrest ordered for mom of boy, 13, resisting chemo

    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernDemocrat View Post
    Oh ok, since Stalin got away with murdering 20 Million people, then Hitler should have gotten away with it to then.
    Do I get to call a Godwin on you?

    Injustices do not excuse other injustices.
    I agree. Is it not unjust to take away individual's free will choice to NOT act?


    His parents could not secure a line of credit and then make their child liable for it. If they did so, they would be breaking the law.
    Your analogy is terribly strained. You should give up on it. Parents are legally responsible for their children. They legally make medical decisions all the time. The kid and the parents don't want treatment. It is legal to refuse medical treatment. They are free to refuse medical treatment.


    You still have to reach the same assessment levels that public and private schooled kids have to reach.
    Unnhuh... Some home schooled kids are fabulous, others....not so much. It depends on the parents doing the homeschooling.

    The parents could choose their child's hospital too, but they cannot deny them life saving treatment.
    Yes. They can.




    Thats an even more absurd example than the others. However, if your kid was getting drunk regularly, and you were leaving alcohol around easily accessible to them, then the authorities could get involved as well.
    Again--you're straining the analogy to make it work for you. I can give my kid a glass of wine with dinner if I want to. I believe it's even legal for me to buy my kid a drink at a restaurant if I wanted to. I don't, and wouldn't, but I think legally, I could.


    Yes, exactly, as in he is a ward of his parents. He is not their property though. They do not own him. They are entrusted with his care. That is why you can lose your custody due to abuse or neglect.
    Not wanting to pump poison into your kid isn't neglect.

    Thats a stupid example.
    Stupid is as stupid does.


    Yes, you are free to make bad decisions as a parent so long as your bad decisions do not grossly endanger the life of your child.
    The parents are not endangering the kid--the disease is. The parents are NOT DOING anything!



    Freedom applies to you as the individual. You are not free to condemn your kids to an agonizing death just because you are an ignorant lunatic.
    The dr.s cannot ensure that the kid WON'T die.

    And WOW--look at all the judgemental name calling. Really tolerant of you.

    Frankly, I don't get this. I can't imagine how anyone, especially a parent (I dont know if you are or are not), could hold the opinion you have on this. Usually I can see the merits of the arguments of those I disagree with, but in this case, to be honest, I don't see any merit to your argument at all. I just think its dangerous and absurd. I am just glad that the vast majority of Americans would disagree with you on this.
    I have 6 kids, and I am the best judge of what is in their best interest because I love them and care for them and I respect other parents enough to be responsible to that love and care also. Further, I respect our freedom to live in liberty. I will not allow my autonomy to be compromised because I disagree with a couple of parent's choice to not act. I will not assent to a usurpation of parental rights even if I think the parents are making the wrong choice since it is not an ACTIVE threat against the child.

  5. #75
    Guru
    ADK_Forever's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Last Seen
    05-07-11 @ 09:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,706

    Re: Arrest ordered for mom of boy, 13, resisting chemo

    Quote Originally Posted by Felicity View Post
    I have 6 kids, and I am the best judge of what is in their best interest because I love them and care for them
    Seriously... huh? How does loving a child give you the ability to know what is right for them in areas in which you are not an expert, or even qualified? If your kid had an absessed tooth, are you saying they would be ok if they inhaled cinnamon incense, if that is what you believed? Or heal a broken leg by laying rabbit poop on the leg, without setting it? Or lay pictures of icebergs on his forehead if he had a spiking 103 degree fever?

    Damn woman, it's not even that these doctors are the only ones saying this is what this kid should undergo. It's the entire medical community!

    How would you feel if they are allowed to let this kid simply eat their cherry pits, or whatever, and the poor kid dies?

    You proposing we ignore all the medical knowledge we've accumulated on this very illness in favor of letting an obviously medically ignorant parent make a life and death decision is astounding. You, the biggest opponent of abortion, which you consider the murder of a human being. You're basically saying that a fetus, no matter how small, has more of a right to life, no matter what the mother's wishes are, than a 13 year old boy.

    Wow.

    and I respect other parents enough to be responsible to that love and care also.
    What if they're NOT responsible?

    Do you condemn the child to death simply to respect the parent's... parenthood?
    Thank You Barack Obama for Restoring Honor To The Presidency.
    President Obama will rank as one of our greatest presidents!

  6. #76
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Tiamat's better half
    Last Seen
    10-28-11 @ 01:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    15,998

    Re: Arrest ordered for mom of boy, 13, resisting chemo

    Quote Originally Posted by Felicity View Post
    The parents are not endangering the kid--the disease is. The parents are NOT DOING anything!
    So if there's a house fire and a child is trapped inside and the parents could easily rescue said child if they wanted to but instead stood around insisting that God would save the kid would that be the fire endangering the child and not the parents. I don't buy that. There is most definitely a point where even ones inaction in a situation makes one complicit.

    The dr.s cannot ensure that the kid WON'T die.
    Perhaps not. But in looking at his case they have given him a very favorable prognosis with treatment, 90+% vs an almost certain death within 5 years sans treatment.

    And WOW--look at all the judgemental name calling. Really tolerant of you.
    No adult should be tolerant of child abuse. Abusers don't get to abuse in the name of the spirit world. And witnesses shouldn't get to ignore the abuse in the name of protecting their own personal freedoms.


    I have 6 kids, and I am the best judge of what is in their best interest because I love them and care for them and I respect other parents enough to be responsible to that love and care also. Further, I respect our freedom to live in liberty. I will not allow my autonomy to be compromised because I disagree with a couple of parent's choice to not act. I will not assent to a usurpation of parental rights even if I think the parents are making the wrong choice since it is not an ACTIVE threat against the child.
    There is no parental right to abuse. If a diabetic child needed insulin shots and the mother went crazy with the fever of religion and up and decided that the child no longer needed the insulin because the spirits and some magic water would keep the kids sugar levels straight the state would absolutely have to step in to protect that child the same way they would have to step in to protect a child who is beaten at the hands of a guardian or molested at the hands of a guardian.

    Your right to do what you want with raising your child ENDS the minute you start abusing that kid, putting that kid in danger, and acting like a lunatic.

    Imagine a child who went into shock if stung by a bee. The mother gets religion and convinces the child the bee sting kit is b.s. Kid gets stung. Drs. claim kid needs shot or he will likely go into anaphylactic shot and die. What do you do? Claim that's a parent's choice to make? No way. What about a kid who has asthma and needs an inhaler? Mom meets a freak on a reservation who says inhalers are b.s. and what they ought to do is eat ginko berries. Kid has asthma attack, can't breath, mom stands by refusing to give kiddo inhaler and instead rubs ginko berry stain all over kids forehead and waits for the gods to do their thing. How is this any less abusive then beating a child or raping a child?

    I think it's incredibly wrongheaded to support this lunatic under the guise of protecting your own parental rights. You have no right to knowingly place your child in jeopardy. You have no right to wait on god in lieu of life saving measures while still keeping your guardianship intact. Your child should be taken from you as surely as the child who gets diddled by the daddy.
    Last edited by talloulou; 05-21-09 at 12:06 AM.

  7. #77
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-06-09 @ 03:03 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    11,946

    Re: Arrest ordered for mom of boy, 13, resisting chemo

    Quote Originally Posted by ADK_Forever View Post
    Damn woman, it's not even that these doctors are the only ones saying this is what this kid should undergo. It's the entire medical community!
    When does a patient have the right to refuse lifesaving medical treatment?


    How would you feel if they are allowed to let this kid simply eat their cherry pits, or whatever, and the poor kid dies?
    How would I feel? Like that matters?

    You proposing we ignore all the medical knowledge we've accumulated on this very illness in favor of letting an obviously medically ignorant parent make a life and death decision is astounding.
    Freedom is a good thing. Even if some people make dumb choices.

    You, the biggest opponent of abortion, which you consider the murder of a human being. You're basically saying that a fetus, no matter how small, has more of a right to life, no matter what the mother's wishes are, than a 13 year old boy.
    Huh? They are not even comparable except that human individuals are respected as autonomous beings.



    Do you condemn the child to death simply to respect the parent's... parenthood?
    Can you guarantee he undergoes the treatment he'll live? Or can you guarantee he'll die without treatment? you can't--no one can. No one's condemning him to death. If he dies, he does so as he chose to live. He's not killing himself, and his parents aren't killing him. They are choosing not to act. one can refuse life saving medical treatment. See the article I linked to above.

  8. #78
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Tiamat's better half
    Last Seen
    10-28-11 @ 01:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    15,998

    Re: Arrest ordered for mom of boy, 13, resisting chemo

    Quote Originally Posted by Felicity View Post
    Can you guarantee he undergoes the treatment he'll live? Or can you guarantee he'll die without treatment? you can't--no one can. No one's condemning him to death. If he dies, he does so as he chose to live. He's not killing himself, and his parents aren't killing him. They are choosing not to act. one can refuse life saving medical treatment. See the article I linked to above.
    So if a child needs daily diabetic insulin shots and is given a 90+% chance of leading a normal life with these shots but little chance in surviving long without the shots it's absolutely fine for some mother to convince said child the drs. are wrong, the shots are unnecessary, and instead the best treatment is to dance naked around the trees while singing to Medusa????

    In such a scenario it's not the parent who is complicit right? It is the diabetes?

    What a load of crap.

  9. #79
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-06-09 @ 03:03 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    11,946

    Re: Arrest ordered for mom of boy, 13, resisting chemo

    Quote Originally Posted by talloulou View Post
    So if there's a house fire and a child is trapped inside and the parents could easily rescue said child if they wanted to but instead stood around insisting that God would save the kid would that be the fire endangering the child and not the parents. I don't buy that. There is most definitely a point where even ones inaction in a situation makes one complicit.
    Houses on fire is irrelevant.

    Perhaps not. But in looking at his case they have given him a very favorable prognosis with treatment, 90+% vs an almost certain death within 5 years sans treatment.
    I agree the parents are making a stupid choice, but they are free to do so. It sure isn't a choice I would make.

    No adult should be tolerant of child abuse. Abusers don't get to abuse in the name of the spirit world. And witnesses shouldn't get to ignore the abuse in the name of protecting their own personal freedoms.
    There is no abuse. The kid is refusing treatment. He's free to do that. The parents don't HAVE TO make him receive treatment. I'll say repeatedly and argue right along side you to convince them to make a different choice, but I stop short of FORCING them to treat since that is tyrannical.


    There is no parental right to abuse. If a diabetic child needed insulin shots and the mother went crazy with the fever of religion and up and decided that the child no longer needed the insulin because the spirits and some magic water would keep the kids sugar levels straight the state would absolutely have to step in to protect that child the same way they would have to step in to protect a child who is beaten at the hands of a guardian or molested at the hands of a guardian.
    Your issue is obviously the religion slant which I have ignored entirely and will continue to do so.

    the parents are not beating or molesting--they are not seeking medical treatment which is entirely legal, though stupid.

    Your right to do what you want with raising your child ENDS the minute you start abusing that kid, putting that kid in danger, and acting like a lunatic.
    It's not abuse. The disease put the kid in danger--the parents didn't give him lymphoma.

    Imagine a child who went into shock if stung by a bee. The mother gets religion and convinces the child the bee sting kit is b.s. Kid gets stung. Drs. claim kid needs shot or he will likely go into anaphylactic shot and die. What do you do? Claim that's a parent's choice to make? No way.
    I'd poke him with the steroids and probably go to jail for assault because I saved him. Mom says no--there is no medical treatment given...legally.

    What about a kid who has asthma and needs an inhaler? Mom meets a freak on a reservation who says inhalers are b.s. and what they ought to do is eat ginko berries. Kid has asthma attack, can't breath, mom stands by refusing to give kiddo inhaler and instead rubs ginko berry stain all over kids forehead and waits for the gods to do their thing. How is this any less abusive then beating a child or raping a child?
    You're hysterical.

    I think it's incredibly wrongheaded to support this lunatic under the guise of protecting your own parental rights. You have no right to knowingly place your child in jeopardy. You have no right to wait on god in lieu of life saving measures while still keeping your guardianship intact. Your child should be taken from you as surely as the child who gets diddled by the daddy.
    So when the state decides your kid is being abused because you took a stupid Christmas picture with funny hats on...don't come crying to me.

  10. #80
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-06-09 @ 03:03 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    11,946

    Re: Arrest ordered for mom of boy, 13, resisting chemo

    Quote Originally Posted by talloulou View Post

    What a load of crap.
    I'm sorry you think freedom is crap.

Page 8 of 15 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •