Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The mother is mentally challenged. She is not capable of making the decision for her daughter. In fact, she let the child make the decision for herself.
This girl has the mental maturity of a ten year old. the court has recognized that. Age is really not the issue as much as the fact that she also is mentally challenged. She obviously does not have the ability to weigh the benefits and risks of treatment.
No one says she is insane, only that she is incapable of making a rational decision about her health care.
Her emotional age is about 10. I think the court recognizes that. I also have reservations about her cognitive ability. A psychological evaluation is not mentioned, but I would be very surprised if she has not had one done.
Folks, if the judge had seen Cassandra to be intelligent and mature, I suspect the ruling would have been different.
Suzy, this is just downright disrespectful. I know you don't agree with what these people are doing and I have a sense of knowing why you feel that way, but no matter how strongly you feel, it's not right to call people mentally challenged just b/c you don't agree with them. Sometimes people have really good reasons for feeling the way they do.
As you know, I have a strong bias towards holistic healing myself and it's not b/c I'm a hippie, though that may have played into it. Actually, it's b/c so many people in my family have died from cancer. I had one aunt who got breast cancer and had surgery only--twice b/c they failed to perform the double mastectomy that she requested. She is still alive and had a bout of colon cancer last year and swore off any further treatment after that one b/c it has left her housebound--the treatment I mean. She has reached the point where she feels that her life is not worth living.
Another aunt got BC, had the full treatment and less than 5 yrs later it was back with metastases to the bones and she died soon after. She never suffered a single side effect from chemo.
Another aunt had breast cancer as well and her ordeal was horrifying to all of us. She reacted badly to the chemo which left burns on her body that appeared to be third degree--believe they said it was one of those antibiotic ones? Nurses in the family felt that her death was from the treatment.
Then a cousin got an inoperable brain tumor at 40 and decided to do holistic since conventional couldn't help him and he is still alive and thriving 20 years later. Unfortunately the wife that he met while doing treatment has died this past year of breast cancer, but she had over 15 years of health before she died.
So, knowing what you know about my family history, you can see why I might have a bit of a bias? Just as I can see where yours comes from after you dealt with a son with cancer. You may not agree with my bias but you can see where it came from.
So, when I got BC myself, it was natural for me to choose holistic healing. Well, at first I thought I'd go full conventional, but the more I researched and read and talked to people and remembered my own horrifying family history, the less inclined I was to go that direction. There is nothing more terrifying than a cancer dx (except one for your child I would think) and your first inclination is to do what the docs order. Well mine started screwing up straight out of the gate and I knew enough about the placebo and nocebo effect that I knew that it would seriously impair my healing. I needed to have confidence in my doc and decided this is not a DIY project and hired a holistic MD. It's more than a year later and I'm doing very well. Too soon yet to say how this will all end up, but the journey has been so rewarding that if I die next year I will feel it's been worth it. I have spent this past year feeling and looking amazing. One of my nurse friends told me she was scared to death when I started treatment but that she would probably do the same if she finds herself in my situation.
My girls are 19 and 22 now and were homeschooled as well. Yeah, I know, I'm a real nutter eh? However, neither one of them is completely sold on the holistic thing--despite the fact that my homemade creams and remedies always cured their ills much better than the drugstore stuff. I'm trying to imagine how it would have gone if one of them had gotten cancer at 17 and I'd tried to impose my ideas on her for how she should be treated. It would not have gone well and either one of them would likely have hauled my tail into court.
They are concerned but not bothering me about my own treatment though--they know better than to interfere in something that I feel this strongly about. They are also grateful to me for homeschooling them and teaching them to think for themselves.
Another thing I want to say about the chemo--hair loss was not a concern at all--I'd already knitted up two really cute chemo caps before I made my decision. What stopped me was the warning I kept hearing from friends who'd had it--chemo brain. I've had ADHD all of my life and the thought of losing any more brain function was what stopped me. Some said it never went away completely and I came to the conclusion that something like that would make life not worth living. Besides, the way I react to meds--completely unpredictably--would make it too high risk. So, maybe I am mentally challenged? But I don't want it to be worse--life is hard enough as it is.
If this girl/woman is 17 or 16, yes I think she has the right to decide for themselves. Why is she allowed the right to decide to end a child's life with abortion, but not make decisions about her own life?
IMHO, all these laws that have differing treatment for when is one an adult depending on the situation are silly. Just have one or two ages, like 16 and 18. But 18 you're a full fledged adult, you can vote, sign a contract, get married, drink alcohol. It would also make these kids grow up faster, making them responsible for their own actions. I'd revive the battle cry of the 60's. "I'm old enough to kill for the army, but not drink a beer?"
You cannot legally drink alcohol until you are 21. A strong argument could be made for increasing the voting and marriage ages to 21, too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stepka
Suzy, this is just downright disrespectful. I know you don't agree with what these people are doing and I have a sense of knowing why you feel that way, but no matter how strongly you feel, it's not right to call people mentally challenged just b/c you don't agree with them. Sometimes people have really good reasons for feeling the way they do.
As you know, I have a strong bias towards holistic healing myself and it's not b/c I'm a hippie, though that may have played into it. Actually, it's b/c so many people in my family have died from cancer. I had one aunt who got breast cancer and had surgery only--twice b/c they failed to perform the double mastectomy that she requested. She is still alive and had a bout of colon cancer last year and swore off any further treatment after that one b/c it has left her housebound--the treatment I mean. She has reached the point where she feels that her life is not worth living.
Another aunt got BC, had the full treatment and less than 5 yrs later it was back with metastases to the bones and she died soon after. She never suffered a single side effect from chemo.
Another aunt had breast cancer as well and her ordeal was horrifying to all of us. She reacted badly to the chemo which left burns on her body that appeared to be third degree--believe they said it was one of those antibiotic ones? Nurses in the family felt that her death was from the treatment.
Then a cousin got an inoperable brain tumor at 40 and decided to do holistic since conventional couldn't help him and he is still alive and thriving 20 years later. Unfortunately the wife that he met while doing treatment has died this past year of breast cancer, but she had over 15 years of health before she died.
So, knowing what you know about my family history, you can see why I might have a bit of a bias? Just as I can see where yours comes from after you dealt with a son with cancer. You may not agree with my bias but you can see where it came from.
So, when I got BC myself, it was natural for me to choose holistic healing. Well, at first I thought I'd go full conventional, but the more I researched and read and talked to people and remembered my own horrifying family history, the less inclined I was to go that direction. There is nothing more terrifying than a cancer dx (except one for your child I would think) and your first inclination is to do what the docs order. Well mine started screwing up straight out of the gate and I knew enough about the placebo and nocebo effect that I knew that it would seriously impair my healing. I needed to have confidence in my doc and decided this is not a DIY project and hired a holistic MD. It's more than a year later and I'm doing very well. Too soon yet to say how this will all end up, but the journey has been so rewarding that if I die next year I will feel it's been worth it. I have spent this past year feeling and looking amazing. One of my nurse friends told me she was scared to death when I started treatment but that she would probably do the same if she finds herself in my situation.
My girls are 19 and 22 now and were homeschooled as well. Yeah, I know, I'm a real nutter eh? However, neither one of them is completely sold on the holistic thing--despite the fact that my homemade creams and remedies always cured their ills much better than the drugstore stuff. I'm trying to imagine how it would have gone if one of them had gotten cancer at 17 and I'd tried to impose my ideas on her for how she should be treated. It would not have gone well and either one of them would likely have hauled my tail into court.
They are concerned but not bothering me about my own treatment though--they know better than to interfere in something that I feel this strongly about. They are also grateful to me for homeschooling them and teaching them to think for themselves.
Another thing I want to say about the chemo--hair loss was not a concern at all--I'd already knitted up two really cute chemo caps before I made my decision. What stopped me was the warning I kept hearing from friends who'd had it--chemo brain. I've had ADHD all of my life and the thought of losing any more brain function was what stopped me. Some said it never went away completely and I came to the conclusion that something like that would make life not worth living. Besides, the way I react to meds--completely unpredictably--would make it too high risk. So, maybe I am mentally challenged? But I don't want it to be worse--life is hard enough as it is.
Stepka, you are an adult and just made a carefully reasoned argument for your personal decision. I might disagree with it, but it is certainly your decision to make. The reason that we are even having this conversation is that Cassandra's mother did not sit her down, explain what needs to be done, then take her to the doctor and get it treated. That is not smart.
Cassandra is a child. Her reason for not wanting chemo is that she does not like the possibilities of hair loss, nausea, and fatigue. She was unable to make a carefully reasoned argument for refusing treatment, and she had no alternative planned. It is a classic case of a teen denying her own mortality, and if you watch the video of her mother, I suspect you would tend to arrive at the same conclusions about mom's ability to parent and make decisions for her daughter that I have.
I do not think the judge made his decision in this case without a thorough psychological evaluation, and the fact that the judge decided that Cassandra is not able to make a decision for herself suggests that there are factors of which we are unaware. I suspect that her intellectual skills are part of that.
Adults may handle chemo drugs less well than younger patients. My son graduated from a private high school with a rigorous curriculum with his original class, was admitted to and graduated in four years from his first choice small, liberal arts college, and now has a masters degree. Permanent brain fog is not an inevitable consequence of chemo.
I think saying she is mentally challenged is completely wrong. She has a mind of a teenager, she doesn't want to suffer through the treatment. Given the prognosis of Hodgkins, I agree she should get treatment.
Not being in the shoes of the mother it's hard to say what I would do in the situation.
I think the decision to take her from her mom was right -- she sounded.... not right. I'll give her the benefit of the doubt, but she actually said to an interviewer that chemo would take away her daughter's chance to have children.
Um. Not getting chemo takes that away, too.
And frankly -- sterility isn't a given, and they can harvest eggs for later so it doesn't matter.
So at the very least the mom is hysterical and uninformed...
I'm not sure why this story has blown up so much. When you're younger than 18, you don't have the legal right to say no to medical attention. When I was 17, I was in a very minor fender bender. They told me I had to go to the hospital, though, because I wasn't old enough to deny medical treatment.
Stepka, you are an adult and just made a carefully reasoned argument for your personal decision. I might disagree with it, but it is certainly your decision to make. The reason that we are even having this conversation is that Cassandra's mother did not sit her down, explain what needs to be done, then take her to the doctor and get it treated. That is not smart.
Right, I caught that, but my point that was buried in that whole long post is many times we have a background that drives our decision making process. That was point A.
Point B is that nothing on this earth would have been able to get me to convince my girls not to get treatment if they were inclined to do it. They love me dearly (I think) and we all have a lot in common, but chances are they would both choose the chemo and I'd have a heck of a time arguing otherwise, even if I were so inclined, which I wouldn't be in this case.
Point C from my earlier post is that if the girl strongly believes that chemo can't help her and will make her worse, the nocebo effect will very likely prove her right. For that reason, I don't think it's ever wise to force medical treatment on someone.
Right, I caught that, but my point that was buried in that whole long post is many times we have a background that drives our decision making process. That was point A.
Point B is that nothing on this earth would have been able to get me to convince my girls not to get treatment if they were inclined to do it. They love me dearly (I think) and we all have a lot in common, but chances are they would both choose the chemo and I'd have a heck of a time arguing otherwise, even if I were so inclined, which I wouldn't be in this case.
Point C from my earlier post is that if the girl strongly believes that chemo can't help her and will make her worse, the nocebo effect will very likely prove her right. For that reason, I don't think it's ever wise to force medical treatment on someone.
I do not think it is a given that the "nocebo effect will likely prove her right."
The girl has never said that she thinks the treatment will not work --- and the odds are that it will --- she has said she does not want to experience what are really not life threatening side effects, specifically hair loss, nausea, and fatigue.
Some women are indeed infertile after chemo, but not all are, and I think none of us would suggest that she forgo treatment and try to get pregnant right away at the age of 17 with a diagnosis of Hodgkin disease, which untreated has a 95 % death rate in five years.
She thinks like a child, and that is why she is being treated like one.
What's all this talk of the mother? The cancer patient is 17 and mentally competent. It's her call. In a few short months, she would be legally capable of signing up with the military, being issued a weapon, and sent overseas to kill (and possibly die) for her country. Telling her she does not have the right to refuse treatment is absolutely and completely violating her patient rights in my book.
What's all this talk of the mother? The cancer patient is 17 and mentally competent. It's her call. In a few short months, she would be legally capable of signing up with the military, being issued a weapon, and sent overseas to kill (and possibly die) for her country. Telling her she does not have the right to refuse treatment is absolutely and completely violating her patient rights in my book.
The court decided she is not competent to make medical decisions for herself.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
However, neither one of them is completely sold on the holistic thing--despite the fact that my homemade creams and remedies always cured their ills much better than the drugstore stuff. I'm trying to imagine how it would have gone if one of them had gotten cancer at 17 and I'd tried to impose my ideas on her for how she should be treated. It would not have gone well and either one of them would likely have hauled my tail into court. 
) and we all have a lot in common, but chances are they would both choose the chemo and I'd have a heck of a time arguing otherwise, even if I were so inclined, which I wouldn't be in this case. 
