• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

17 year old girl fights to stop lifesaving treatment

F

fskimospy

Elite Member
http://theweek.com/article/index/27...ith-cancer-fighting-to-stop-medical-treatment

Basically a 17 year old girl with Hodgkin's Lymphoma doesn't want chemo because she thinks it's 'poison'. Hodgkin's lymphoma is generally easily treated and has an over 80% CURE rate. (not just 5 year survival, but cure)

What do you think? Adults have a right to refuse medical treatment as they have a right to their own body. This girl is only 17. Additionally, her perspective of chemo being 'poison' seems a bit... well... teenagerishly stupid in that she's going to die without it.

I'm a bit torn, I don't know what the right answer is here.
 
eskimospy said:
I'm a bit torn, I don't know what the right answer is here.
Click to expand...


There is no right answer.

That said she is a minor and therefore my belief is that until she is otherwise this should be handled in that light. If she remains willfully ignorant later in life that then would be her sorry right.
 
Sucks but I tend to default to a your body, your rules attitude. Given that her brain isn't developed enough to fully understand the consequences of her actions does make this a difficult situation, but what is the alternative? Force her to accept treatment and maybe she grows into a healthy adult, maybe she grows into a mental case that blames everything that goes wrong in her life on the "poison" she was forced to take.
 
eskimospy said:
http://theweek.com/article/index/27...ith-cancer-fighting-to-stop-medical-treatment

Basically a 17 year old girl with Hodgkin's Lymphoma doesn't want chemo because she thinks it's 'poison'. Hodgkin's lymphoma is generally easily treated and has an over 80% CURE rate. (not just 5 year survival, but cure)

What do you think? Adults have a right to refuse medical treatment as they have a right to their own body. This girl is only 17. Additionally, her perspective of chemo being 'poison' seems a bit... well... teenagerishly stupid in that she's going to die without it.

I'm a bit torn, I don't know what the right answer is here.
Click to expand...

I'm generally in the camp of letting people make their own decisions for their own lives, so long as other innocent people are not harmed by that decision. The only issue is that she's still a minor, so you take that into account.

Ultimately, I don't believe in forcing people to undergo medical treatment they don't want, and she's sufficiently close to being a legal adult that she should be fully aware of her decisions and potential consequences. I say let her decide, no matter how foolish her decision might appear.
 
If chemo wasn't poison it wouldn't work.

She does have the right to refuse treatment though, although I think it's stupid to when you have a highly treatable form of cancer. It would be one thing if she had a diagnosis where the chemo would just add 1-2 months, but 80%+ survival rate? Yeah, that's stupid on her part, but it is her right to be stupid.
 
Chemo is a poison. But it is one option to cure cancer. If she doesn't want to cure herself who is the state to tell her she has to take Chemo? She isn't 7 and doesn't know better. She is about to turn 18. It seems a bit a waste of time for the state to go through these proceedings when in less than 9 months she can elect to stop treatment anyways.

Of course my issue is when she backs herself into a corner she will probably have the state spend hundreds of thousands to prolong her life for a few months. If only we had death panels for people who make stupid life or death decisions.
 
Strk said:
If chemo wasn't poison it wouldn't work.
Click to expand...

Yeah I'd be willing to bet that treatment wasn't framed right when first explained to her. Something along the lines of "chemo will help make you better" rather than "chemo is poison but won't kill you and will cure you." Then after hearing the former she does a little internet searching ad finds out that chemo is poison and suddenly she can't trust the medical establishment.
 
Hayabusa Rider said:
There is no right answer.

That said she is a minor and therefore my belief is that until she is otherwise this should be handled in that light. If she remains willfully ignorant later in life that then would be her sorry right.
Click to expand...

If I were forced to choose that's where I would fall as well. While it might be arbitrary, we do draw a bright line at age 18 where you gain (basically) full adult autonomy. Still, as others have mentioned she is right that chemo is poisonous, and we're subjecting a near-adult to a pretty rotten set of medical procedures for at a minimum many months against her will. Pretty ugly.
 
dank69 said:
Yeah I'd be willing to bet that treatment wasn't framed right when first explained to her. Something along the lines of "chemo will help make you better" rather than "chemo is poison but won't kill you and will cure you." Then after hearing the former she does a little internet searching ad finds out that chemo is poison and suddenly she can't trust the medical establishment.
Click to expand...

"Chemo is poison". Nobody would have said that in the medical profession, but there is something which is not optional, and that is getting informed consent. That would include all the potential bad things which could happen. She or anyone acting as her guardian cannot be told "chemo will help make you better" and leave it at that. That's not even legal.
 
Hayabusa Rider said:
"Chemo is poison". Nobody would have said that in the medical profession, but there is something which is not optional, and that is getting informed consent. That would include all the potential bad things which could happen. She or anyone acting as her guardian cannot be told "chemo will help make you better" and leave it at that. That's not even legal.
Click to expand...
Yes, I'm just giving a crude example of how it may have been framed, or what she may have taken from any explanations in what I imagine was a fragile state of mind.
 
eskimospy said:
If I were forced to choose that's where I would fall as well. While it might be arbitrary, we do draw a bright line at age 18 where you gain (basically) full adult autonomy. Still, as others have mentioned she is right that chemo is poisonous, and we're subjecting a near-adult to a pretty rotten set of medical procedures for at a minimum many months against her will. Pretty ugly.
Click to expand...

As I said, there is no right solution. "Chemo is poison" really isn't a fair description of treatment. It certainly kills cancer cells and there will be side effects and collateral damage (hair loss for example), but the reality is that a long healthy life free from this illness is the most likely outcome. Unpleasant? Probably, but in the end one thing dies, and that's the cancer, not her. This reminds me of all the vaccination threads where possible adverse effects are (correctly) mentioned, but the benefit verses risk seems to be avoided. I wonder if the girl is influenced by those who think that way.
 
Hayabusa Rider said:
As I said, there is no right solution. "Chemo is poison" really isn't a fair description of treatment. It certainly kills cancer cells and there will be side effects and collateral damage (hair loss for example), but the reality is that a long healthy life free from this illness is the most likely outcome. Unpleasant? Probably, but in the end one thing dies, and that's the cancer, not her. This reminds me of all the vaccination threads where possible adverse effects are (correctly) mentioned, but the benefit verses risk seems to be avoided. I wonder if the girl is influenced by those who think that way.
Click to expand...

I agree, as someone who has had enough chemo to last a lifetime I can attest to the fact that it is very unpleasant. That being said, I wouldn't be here today without it and I regret exactly nothing about my choice.

Honestly this sounds like a dumb teenager who reads too much naturalnews.com or whatever to me. She might curse people later for 'poisoning' her, but at least she will be alive and healthy to curse them. I know I held a bunch of dumb ideas when I was 17. I would hate to see her die for hers.
 
Her family isn't even fighting her to take the treatment.

It's a shame, given that she has a high survival rate to cure this, but, if that is what she wants, so be it.

I mean, are they going to kick down her door and give her chemo if she doesn't show up or go for treatment? What are the consequences for her just not showing up? Unless they plan on imprisoning her parents for not forcing her to take chemo,...
 
Hayabusa Rider said:
As I said, there is no right solution. "Chemo is poison" really isn't a fair description of treatment. It certainly kills cancer cells and there will be side effects and collateral damage (hair loss for example), but the reality is that a long healthy life free from this illness is the most likely outcome. Unpleasant? Probably, but in the end one thing dies, and that's the cancer, not her. This reminds me of all the vaccination threads where possible adverse effects are (correctly) mentioned, but the benefit verses risk seems to be avoided. I wonder if the girl is influenced by those who think that way.
Click to expand...
You never cease to amaze!! Most if not all your posts are thoughtful and pretty much right on the money!! With that said -- My youngest sister had to have chemo in her early 20`s. She was very afraid and thought like this woman that Chemo was poison.
She went to 2 or 3 different Doctors seeking what she felt was the whole truth.
Finally she came upon a doctor who turned her thoughts back on her.
He told her chemo is not poison, but if you believe so I contend that it is possible to use a poison as you would call chemo to cure what is wrong with you!

She had chemo therapy and the cancer has left her going on almost 30 years now....

### A disclaimer####It doesn`t matter if some goofball comes in and acts all stupid questioning what I just posted. For some reason these forums at times have turned into idiots being idiots for the sake of idiocracy @!
 
Sounds like this girl is below the mental retardation line. Pretty shitty parents if they don't make her do it.
 
Newell Steamer said:
Her family isn't even fighting her to take the treatment.

It's a shame, given that she has a high survival rate to cure this, but, if that is what she wants, so be it.

I mean, are they going to kick down her door and give her chemo if she doesn't show up or go for treatment? What are the consequences for her just not showing up? Unless they plan on imprisoning her parents for not forcing her to take chemo,...
Click to expand...

Pretty sure there have been cases in the past where parents have been jailed for refusing to treat their children, yes.

While this case is a tough one for me, I 100% support prosecuting parents who willingly deny their children medical treatment.
 
I did not know the survival cure rate until now.
80%...

My brain just exploded at the prospect of rejecting such an offer. I attribute the objection as coming from an irrational teenager who is mentally unfit to make this judgement.

If her turning 18 allows her to harpoon a treatment with 80% cure... and she were my family, I'd wish for a way to use force. Something akin to having her committed... I'd begrudgingly accept the choice for an older, more mature person. Not for a teenager.

Problem is, if her family stands by her choice... it makes it all that much more difficult to object. Also might explain why she made that choice. Did her family talk her out of treatment?
 
Last edited:
eskimospy said:
Pretty sure there have been cases in the past where parents have been jailed for refusing to treat their children, yes.

While this case is a tough one for me, I 100% support prosecuting parents who willingly deny their children medical treatment.
Click to expand...

Well, looks like she is being forced,.. http://www.nbcnews.com/health/cancer/connecticut-teen-curable-cancer-fights-stop-chemo-n281511

But Fortin's behavior — including a string of skipped, refused or prematurely stopped medical appointments and tests involving her ill daughter — ultimately convinced child-protection investigators to temporarily take custody of Cassandra in December, removing her from Fortin's home. Agents also seized the teen's cell phone. She is now staying in a constantly monitored room at CCMC, the hospital where she's receiving chemotherapy, court records show.
Click to expand...

Ugh,...
"It would be higher if you're early stage. ... The treatment's very good. It's all outpatient, usually well tolerated. Yes, patients lose their hair. Yes, there are risks to it. But in young, healthy patients, the vast majority of them get through it and go ahead and live essentially normal lives."
Click to expand...
I think there is something else wrong with this girl - mentally. Not like retarded,.. but, emotionally and psychologically.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top