State seizes cancer-stricken girl

[Chunkee]

State seizes cancer-stricken girl.

 

[Tab]

"I think they should treat her for what her body calls for and not standard protocol. Nobody will look at that," she said. "Not every cancer is the same. Nobody understands that. Her body is not standard, and her cancer is not standard."

The couple, members of the Church of God, have said they oppose blood transfusions unless they were from Katie's mother. But the couple's attorney, Daniel Horne, said religion wasn't at issue in the fight over cancer treatment.

Rather, they believe doctors haven't been upfront about Katie's care and have not answered all their questions about the side effects of the radiation.

"This issue is about parental rights, not about religious rights," Horne said. "They just want to be informed of her treatment. They want to be involved in this."

I call BS!

 

[dullard]

The CNN report on TV was much better done. This article leaves many questions unanswered. I'll attempt to fill in the blanks.

1) Earlier, that same daughter needed blood transfusions to stay alive. The parents refused. That is, until she was on her death bed and the parents finally let her get them to save her life.
2) Now she desperately needs radiation treatment for her cancer (4 doctors have examined her independantly and all reached that same conclusion). The parents say all they want is a second oppinion (strange considering 4 doctors have examined her so far). They want to take it to court but haven't yet been able to find a doctor that supports their view that she doesn't need it.

Personally, I believe that parents don't have the right to refuse simple, cheap, and nearly risk free treatments (such as a blood transfusion). Radiation and other treatments which has serious problems are another story. But given their past attempts to kill their daughter by refusing blood, I will side with the state on this case.

 

[Tab]

This is just disgusting... I hope the state doesn't give the child back to the parents either...

 

[imported_Dimicron]

It sounds like the child has been possibly "brainwashed" into refusing treatment by her religious parents. However it should be pointed out that Pope John Paul did not refuse any medical treatments so therefore this child should not be able to refuse them, especially if many docs agree it is necessary.

 

[Tab]

I don't think this applies to the pope... Right? I think these are Jevohavs Witness(sp?)

 

[cKGunslinger]

Hmm.. difficult. I'm all for parent's rights trumping the rights of the state, except in cases of abuse and mistreatment. Does disallowing a potentially harmful, yet often effective, form of cancer treatment constitute abuse? I'm not sure...

 

[imported_Dimicron]

Originally posted by: Tab
I don't think this applies to the pope... Right? I think these are Jevohavs Witness(sp?)

I'm not sure, but very very generally speaking, most Christians at least respect the pope, even if they don't agree with everything he stands for.

In any case this is a difficult decision to be made. On one hand I can't blame the parents for not wanting to nuke their child, especially with all the medicine commercials on TV, the side effects of what is advertised are ofter worse than what the drug is supposed to cure. On the other hand, I'd think that most parents would want anything and everything done to keep their child alive and healthy (see Terri Schiavo).

 

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: Tab
I don't think this applies to the pope... Right? I think these are Jevohavs Witness(sp?)

I have a really close friend that practiced with the Witnesses. He actually carried a card that stated that we was not to receive any blood tranfusions. He was, however, able to receive plasma.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: Dimicron

Originally posted by: Tab
I don't think this applies to the pope... Right? I think these are Jevohavs Witness(sp?)

I'm not sure, but very very generally speaking, most Christians at least respect the pope, even if they don't agree with everything he stands for.

In any case this is a difficult decision to be made. On one hand I can't blame the parents for not wanting to nuke their child, especially with all the medicine commercials on TV, the side effects of what is advertised are ofter worse than what the drug is supposed to cure. On the other hand, I'd think that most parents would want anything and everything done to keep their child alive and healthy (see Terri Schiavo).

Catholics respect the pope, a lot of the methodist and lutheran churchs I know dont.

 

[dmcowen674]

Michele Wernecke was arrested on charges of interfering with child custody and was released Monday after posting $50,000 bond.

The Werneckes' three sons were placed in a foster home.
========================================

While sad for this family, I have to laugh at America now Religion Vs Religion.

This is the Christian Taliban Government you wanted, this is what you get.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Hmm.. difficult. I'm all for parent's rights trumping the rights of the state, except in cases of abuse and mistreatment. Does disallowing a potentially harmful, yet often effective, form of cancer treatment constitute abuse? I'm not sure...

Sounds like abuse to me.

 

[bamacre]

This is a Good Read, OP.