um, z? are you sure you're not a libertarian? (part 8)

File this under the same category as the "California Uber Alles" posts.

Minnesota is threatening to take custody of a 13 year old who is refusing traditional cancer treatment. Some time after being diagnosed with Hodgkin's lymphoma, he did go through one round of chemotherapy treatment.  With the side effects and their religious beliefs, they have decided to pursue alternative therapies ever since.  The parents have said that if the tumor grows, they will consider chemo and radiation again. The boy appeared in court last week, firm in his resolve, well-spoken, and looking healthy. 

I'm no fan of religion, but I do support religious freedom, to a point.  The fact that the Hausers are white people following a Native American religion doesn't make me any more sympathetic to their cause.  Neither does the evidence that Hodgkin's lymphoma is a highly treatable form of cancer.  That is, I find it easier to sympathize with someone seeking alternative treatment when the most likely outcome from chemo & radiation is increased sickness before an untimely death than I do someone who might fully recover with traditional medical treatment.  I am also no stranger to the powerful influence of parents' beliefs on their wards. And I don't think parents should have unrestricted authority over their children.  There are absolutely times when children should be taken out of the home. 

Nonetheless, I think the state should back the fuck off.  No one has attempted to argue that these parents don't care about their kid (kids, actually; they have many).  The state simply believes that their form of medicine is best, and that, since it is best, the Hausers have to use it.  Beyond the scientific ignorance and arrogance of that belief (what if every sick child had been ordered to have leech treatments?), is the apparently prevailing medical view that existence is the only part of life worth defending. I have similar feelings about the extremists in the pro-life movement.  

I don't doubt that the doctors and the judge are trying to do the right thing.  But it's not their job to make medical decisions for the citizens of this country.  Ironically, of course, our government does not financially support medical treatment for a huge portion of Americans, but they'll force unwanted treatment on others.

Back. The fuck. Off.

(I started writing this last week, and got distracted.  The boy has since been ordered to get chemo by the court.  Today the news reports that the boy and his mother have gone AWOL.  Yep. They're on the run.  Good idea? No. Inevitable? Nope.  Still not the state's fucking business? Check.

Comments

[Miss Bliss]

Yep I'm with you 100% on this one. Look it might not be the choice I'd make for myself or even for my kid but it should absolutely NOT be the government's decision in this situation. These people are NOT crazy, they are not un-informed, and from the sound of things they are not even really making a decision that is remotely difficult to understand...so WTF?

[zoe]

Now they say if they find the kid, they're going to put him into foster care. Excellent.

[Vinnie]

when you're ready for your subscription to reason magazine, let me know.