Mother, son missing in forced chemo case

Mother, son missing in forced chemo case

www.cnn.com

A Minnesota judge issued an arrest warrant Tuesday for the mother of Daniel Hauser, a 13-year-old boy who is refusing treatment for his cancer, after neither she nor the boy showed up for a court appearance

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.myfoxtwincities.com

Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Judge rules family can't refuse chemo for boy

Ok so this is my first post in this forum so if it's not correct sorry. I also did not see this on here so if it's been discussed delete it. Thanks..
I was flipping channels and came across this on CNN.
From reading the article it seems the mother planned not to show and already had a plan set as to where she was going to go. I personally dont think the government should be involved. From what I have read he doesnt want the treatment. Personally I think if he doesnt want it let him be.

www.cnn.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply to post by mblahnikluver


And the story drama unfolds before our very eyes......


Hard case, I don't know all the details but these types are always tricky. But you know what I don't think a kid at that age has the right to make his own decision, sorry I don't. I know how I was at 13 (10 years ago....wow seems like yesterday,lol) and I definitely wasn't ready for that kind of decision. I know I wouldn't trust myself then to make that kind of choice. But if the cancer is in earlier stages then it is very curable (I do know he had Hodgkin's disease) and regardless the pain of chemo if it will cure you then you must do it, anything else would be tantamount to suicide and anyone impeding the process of the curing chemo would be assisting suicide. Now are we ready to tell people they can't kill themselves on a legal level? We already do, it just is not written into any laws that I know of. Especially going against the ruling of the court regarding the child is worthy of a warrant as far as the legal standpoint goes. Morally who knows, we can argue that all our lives but all we have is what we have, and that is the law in cases like these. That is my opinion on the case. Now I would like to know where they intend to go though!


Thanks for finding this and bringing it to our attention, star and flag.

reply to post by jkrog08


I only heard of this story recently on here otherwise I might have just changed the channel. I do wonder where they plan on going with him being sick. He is bound to end up in a hospital at some point. As far as him making his own choice I wont argue with you at all on your opinion because the more I read about this the more my opinion bounces back and forth honestly..I am 30 and I honestly cant remember 13 so I dont know what I would have done. I think this is just a sad situation all around. I do hope this kid gets well and some kind of treatment though.

reply to post by mblahnikluver


I do think the boy should have the final say in all of this, seeing as he is the one who is sick. The judge is wrong to do this and should have no right to do so. I could understand if the boy wanted to get chemo, but the parents refused, then I could see some intervention on the judges part, but that is obviously not the case. I really hope this kid gets better somehow, no one deserves this. This kid is going through what most of us can't understand until we would have it ourselves and it's turning into a media circus all because of a judge.

reply to post by mblahnikluver


Yea it is a bad situation and I too feel sorry for him. And yes he will end up in a hospital, probably on a morphine pump on his last breath since his mom doesn't want to treat him properly.

The boy does have a right to his own decisions, albeit he is extremely young, but it is his choice.

What angers me is, they would rather pray then take help......

He and his parents opted instead for "alternative medicines" based on their religious beliefs.

Foxnews.com

I see alot of guiding from the parents in this, telling him the good thing to do, theres a 90 percent chance chemo will cure him, and well it's going to be very sad when he dies, and everyone will claim god works in mysterious ways, but when it comes down to it, a 13 year old boy died. Died. Gone forever, for ignorance.

If he does live, by the far far far chance of it, there practically fugitives now for it.

reply to post by jkrog08


Even though I do disagree with your opinion, nevertheless, you do bring up a good point. At such a young age, we are still in childhood. It is a very big decision and it's very hard to say what is right or wrong in this. You can imagine all of the back and forth arguements this poor kid is putting up with. He's in the middle of two opposing sides, especially now that this is in the news. I can't even begin to imagine his situation. My reason for it being whatever the boy wants because he has been through it and probably has more of an idea of whats going on than he is given credit for. Just the base of my opinion on this anyway. But another thing I was thinking about you had brought up, where do they take this kid? Unless they got a friend who is a doctor or in the medical field somehow who can sneak all that he needs without going to the hospital, but that's probably not likely.

If you're ready to die at that age, then why not go for it. It's really not others place to judge, what the difference of dieing at age 13, 30, or 80? If you're a Christian, then what's the difference? I would hardly call getting cancer "suicide", whether or not he gets treated with conventional medicine there's always a chance of death. So I wouldn't say "he must do it". If you don't die today, there's always tomorrow.

Perhaps this shows a weakness within the healthcare system. That currently there are only 3 main ways to treat cancer, chemo, radiation, and surgery. If a patient refuses those, shouldn't there be alternatives? I've heard of other treatments that are a little more experimental, but its better than nothing. Some of those experimental treatments are much more "natural" as well. It'd be nice if he didn't have to run away from mainstream medicine. If he could get some sort of treatment in a hospital without having to run away....part of providing high quality care is also being flexible for a patient instead of being paternalistic and forcing a patient to your line of thinking.

And he won't be "gone forever" if you're a religion person seeing as there is an afterlife without things like cancer.

[edit on 19-5-2009 by ghaleon12]

Yes, Hodgkin's disease. Thats what my cousin died of around 20 ish. He had chemo, and it put it into remission, and then it returned. Alas, he had no immune system left and it ravished him quickly. Chemo is something that has to be carefully thought out, and if your immune system is a lemon, its not a smart move. My kids won't be receiving it.

Chemo Kills--- and that judge had no right to impinge upon the mothers beliefs that Chemo Kills. Incase you havent heard how awful Chemotherapy is--- research it on the internet.

Im glad the mother took off- the government has no right to force us or our children to do chemotherapy if we get cancer.

reply to post by Republican08


Yeah the more I read the more it seems like the parents are swaying his opinion. If there is a 90% chance of survival you would think his parents would be for the treatment. This is sad truly.

reply to post by xynephadyn


I do know how bad chemo is, I watched two people go through it more than once. It was horrible to watch and I cant even imagine going through it but it saved their lives.. Today they are very happy and living full lives with their families. I dont think the govt should ever get involved like this.

I think this is a very interesting case as the ruling on the part of the Judge really does bespeak that it is the State that ultimately owns us and can make decisions that supercede those of the parents and the child.

This does tend to demonstrate that all children are simply wards of the State and parents are only 'granted' the 'privelage' of seeing to their rearing, shelter and sustinance only up to a limited point.

I can't possibly see how chemo therapy could be good for a person. I honestly thing the few people who survive a serious chemo regimen would have likely survived the cancer because of an incredibly strong constitution that not only was able to survive on a constant bombardment of chemical concoctions but was also strong enough to force the cancer into remission all on it's own at the same time.

I suspect most cancer treatments are simply profiteering off of controlled murder on the part of the health establishment. They charge a fortune for it and seldom offer any real hope beyond this is about the only thing we can do.

I hope this mother and her child are able to stay free of a far too intrusive State and it's desire to entangle them and force them to make a decision the State surely should not have a right to make.

reply to post by ProtoplasmicTraveler

I think this is a very interesting case as the ruling on the part of the Judge really does bespeak that it is the State that ultimately owns us and can make decisions that supercede those of the parents and the child.

It would be interesting for me to know if the parents were married using a state issued marriage license.
If so - then they’re sadly out of luck.
The marriage license grants the State jurisdiction over your marriage including the fruit of your marriage - meaning your children.
Sad but true.

And no, the judge has NO business being involved.

American was once a place where people flocked in order to escape persecution for their religious beliefs and be allowed to practice such beliefs in peace...

Regardless if you’re religious or not - the State has no busyness treading all over this family with their big nazi footsteps.

peace

reply to post by ghaleon12

what the difference of dieing at age 13, 30, or 80?

There's a big difference, in the other thread on this issue it discusses that this child had a learning disability and the grounds that the judge ruled on. I side with the judge, his reasoning was sound. This child does not understand the consequences of his decisions, therefore he should not be allowed to deny treatment.

reply to post by xynephadyn

Chemo Kills

The chemotherapy was actually successful so far, it was working for him. When he stopped treatment he got worse.

[edit on 20-5-2009 by rapinbatsisaltherage]

It's a slippery slope saying the govt. should decide.

My niece had childhood cancer - rhabdo - and at one point the doctors wanted to amputate her arm - and were adamant it be done, even though even with amputation none of these kids - at this time - were surviving.

My sister talked to my neice who did not want to lose her arm, and ended up having to fight the doctors tooth and nail. Luckily social 'services' did not get involved.

My niece was one of the few kids - at this time in history - to ever go into remission with this cancer and today is 30 years old and has 2 children they said she'd never have. (Because of the damage to her ovaries from radiation.)

She still has both arms and is a beautiful woman.

I think that whole family is crazy.

The husband is asked by the judge where his wife and kid is and he says he doesn't know. She told me she was leaving and then she left.

Reminds me of that he haw song.

Where O' where are you tonight
Why did you leave me all alone

I though I found true love
And then one day
(make fart sound with hands)
You were gone.


I'm wondering if the mom and dad are mentally stable.

reply to post by hadriana

It's a slippery slope saying the govt. should decide.

No, the government should not always decide but you have to look at individual cases. In some instances government intervention is good, in some it is bad, there is no black and white.