View Poll Results: So, should parents be allowed to refuse life saving treatment for their children?

Voters
142. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, parents should be allowed

    31 21.83%
  • No, parents should not be allowed

    97 68.31%
  • I don't know

    14 9.86%
Page 7 of 19 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 181

Thread: Should parents be allowed to refuse life saving treatment for their children?

  1. #61
    Liberal Fascist For Life!

    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:00 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    86,451
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Should parents be allowed to refuse life saving treatment for their children?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Yes, parent's should be allowed to refuse life saving treatement such as the continuation of gestation for their unborn children.

    ***
    Seriously though, I'm voting 'yes' not because I suport parent's killing their children for reasons I may disagree with, but only because I don't want the governement involved in activly making decisions like this.

    If someone can demonstrate how the state has a compelling interest to impose an undue burdon on a parent's right in the 'care controle and custodey' of their children (see Troxil), I'm open to such an argument.

    And before you start: Personal objection to religious beliefs do not constitute any such compelling interest.
    Thank you for putting it better than I can. I tend to believe that government intrusion on personal rights is bad, even when the outcome may be good. In the same way we have to allow Nazi's to make fools of themselves publicly, we have to allow parents the right to be idiots. It's sad that innocents might suffer, but personal freedoms are not without costs.

  2. #62
    activist professor Inferno's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Tipping Velvet
    Last Seen
    07-01-09 @ 12:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    2,017

    Re: Should parents be allowed to refuse life saving treatment for their children?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Yes, parent's should be allowed to refuse life saving treatement such as the continuation of gestation for their unborn children.

    ***
    Seriously though, I'm voting 'yes' not because I suport parent's killing their children for reasons I may disagree with, but only because I don't want the governement involved in activly making decisions like this.

    If someone can demonstrate how the state has a compelling interest to impose an undue burdon on a parent's right in the 'care controle and custodey' of their children (see Troxil), I'm open to such an argument.

    And before you start: Personal objection to religious beliefs do not constitute any such compelling interest.
    I agree that I don't want to give the government the option of telling a parent what they have to do to care for their child. I guess i don't want the government telling me i need to wear a seat belt either. All the little things that government does that interferes with our lives.
    Democracy is the road to socialism. Karl Marx
    Life member NY city Fisting Club!
    I am Zoochie Purple Quivering Ghost Bear a Tiki Bar Tarte, you want some of my Panties.

  3. #63
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 11:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Should parents be allowed to refuse life saving treatment for their children?

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    In this situation, what should occur would be a court ruling on whether parental rights should be terminated. A court would review the situation and see whether the child is being neglected, abused, abandoned, whether their is severe mental illness/substance abuse by the parent, and whether the child's long term needs are being met. Health and life would constitute long term needs. Religious beliefs, or beliefs of the parents are trumped when the safety of the child is in jeopardy.

    In this specific situation, the courts would make the determination whether the parents have violated statutes. For example, in NJ, where I reside, the health and safety of the child is of paramount concern (N.J. Stat. Ann. 30:4C-11.1(a)). I believe that if this case were held in my state, the parental rights would be terminated, considering the health and safety of the child as being primary. Other states vary in how they handle this.

    One additional thing to consider is the wishes of the child. Several states consider this in the evaluation. The NJ statute is vauge on this, allowing for interpretation. Other states have more specific statutes, some allowing a child as young as 12 to have his/her wishes be an important determinant. Since, in the case of the OP, the child seems to want to adhere to his parents' wishes, this could be an important factor.
    That's a susinct rendering of the Pro-Life stance regarding abortion, but I digress.

  4. #64
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 11:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Should parents be allowed to refuse life saving treatment for their children?

    Quote Originally Posted by Inferno View Post
    I agree that I don't want to give the government the option of telling a parent what they have to do to care for their child. I guess i don't want the government telling me i need to wear a seat belt either. All the little things that government does that interferes with our lives.
    You know, seat belt laws are a mixxed issue for me. Same regarding helmit laws.

    I like how my state handles the issue with helmits: Minors have to wear them, adults don't. I think the same should apply to seat belts.

    Now don't get me wrong, my opinion has nothing to do with fatality rates, so all such arguments will fall on deff ears with me.

    Seatbelts and helmits, like medical decisions, are hands-off to the governement unless a compelling state interest can be established.

    I think such a compelling interest has been established regarding seatbelts and helmits, but I've not seen any such interest regarding medical decisions.

  5. #65
    activist professor Inferno's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Tipping Velvet
    Last Seen
    07-01-09 @ 12:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    2,017

    Re: Should parents be allowed to refuse life saving treatment for their children?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    You know, seat belt laws are a mixed issue for me. Same regarding helmets laws.

    I like how my state handles the issue with helmets: Minors have to wear them, adults don't. I think the same should apply to seat belts.

    Now don't get me wrong, my opinion has nothing to do with fatality rates, so all such arguments will fall on deff ears with me.

    Seatbelts and helmets, like medical decisions, are hands-off to the government unless a compelling state interest can be established.

    I think such a compelling interest has been established regarding seatbelts and helmets, but I've not seen any such interest regarding medical decisions.
    I know that seat belts and helmets can be a life saving difference. I just don't think that there should be a law about it. There are times in Chicago and the surrounding areas that the police set up road checks and write tickets by the score for non compliance with the seat belt laws.

    That is a bit extreme if you ask me. It just seems a way to drum up revenue. Like the monster cigarette taxes.
    Democracy is the road to socialism. Karl Marx
    Life member NY city Fisting Club!
    I am Zoochie Purple Quivering Ghost Bear a Tiki Bar Tarte, you want some of my Panties.

  6. #66
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 11:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Should parents be allowed to refuse life saving treatment for their children?

    Quote Originally Posted by Inferno View Post
    I know that seat belts and helmets can be a life saving difference. I just don't think that there should be a law about it. There are times in Chicago and the surrounding areas that the police set up road checks and write tickets by the score for non compliance with the seat belt laws.

    That is a bit extreme if you ask me. It just seems a way to drum up revenue. Like the monster cigarette taxes.
    I'm not a smoker and I think cigarette taxes are bull****.

    Oh but wate, according to your recent abortion thread, I realy shouldn't have a say on cigarette taxes since I don't smoke

    "Why do non-smokers have a cigarette tax opinion"

  7. #67
    activist professor Inferno's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Tipping Velvet
    Last Seen
    07-01-09 @ 12:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    2,017

    Re: Should parents be allowed to refuse life saving treatment for their children?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    I'm not a smoker and I think cigarette taxes are bull****.

    Oh but wate, according to your recent abortion thread, I really shouldn't have a say on cigarette taxes since I don't smoke

    "Why do non-smokers have a cigarette tax opinion"
    I don't think it is about the tax on cigarettes that matters so much. It is the tax on anything. If you don't like the cigarette tax I bet you don't like the one on liquor or your paycheck either.
    Democracy is the road to socialism. Karl Marx
    Life member NY city Fisting Club!
    I am Zoochie Purple Quivering Ghost Bear a Tiki Bar Tarte, you want some of my Panties.

  8. #68
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 11:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Should parents be allowed to refuse life saving treatment for their children?

    Quote Originally Posted by Inferno View Post
    I don't think it is about the tax on cigarettes that matters so much. It is the tax on anything. If you don't like the cigarette tax I bet you don't like the one on liquor or your paycheck either.
    True that

  9. #69
    Professor
    Marilyn Monroe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Last Seen
    03-06-14 @ 02:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    2,137

    Re: Should parents be allowed to refuse life saving treatment for their children?

    I say "no" as long as it is truly "life-saving" and not life prolonging. In a case such as "life-saving" I think the government would want at least three doctor's opinions on the quantity over quality. If there's no longer any quality then I say, "yes" the parents should have the final say.
    "It's not that I'm afraid to die, I just don't want to be there when it happens." Woody Allen.

  10. #70
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 11:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Should parents be allowed to refuse life saving treatment for their children?

    Quote Originally Posted by Marilyn Monroe View Post
    I say "no" as long as it is truly "life-saving" and not life prolonging. In a case such as "life-saving" I think the government would want at least three doctor's opinions on the quantity over quality. If there's no longer any quality then I say, "yes" the parents should have the final say.
    I think your useing very sujective qualifyers here, similer to pain, and don't forget that requiering the opinion of 3 phisitions lost Tesas the Roe decision

Page 7 of 19 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... 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
  •