Parents' Rights, Judges' Rules

In the battle between families and the courts over medical treatment for kids, who has the last word?

By Kate Dailey | Newsweek Web Exclusive
May 19, 2009 | Updated: 4:31  p.m. ET May 19, 2009

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: NoBlood @ 05/24/2009 11:14:17 PM

    You revealed the issue well. Issues like this have a way of spawning alternatives that prove to be superior in many ways than the orthodox treatments. For instance, alternative non-blood susbstitutes are now common in many hospitals and the conscientious individual wishing to "abstain from blood" (Acts 15:20, 28) can now select even open-heart surgeries without blood. See also http://www.noblood.org/.

    Personally, I think it is constructive to have "informed consent," where doctors, judges and parents/ patients work constructively together to locate a specialist that can work with the parent/ patient's reasonable constraints. Perhaps the parent/ patient has research of which the doctors and judges are unaware. For instance, a doctor who has not been trained in bloodless surgery might criticize such a procedure until he learns that bloodless surgery is standard procedure in "no blood" centers in many hospitals.

    Likewise for chemo, it would be nice to see the medical community come up with a "safer" alternative.

    Michael Morris
    www.noblood.com

  • Posted By: DannyHaszard @ 05/24/2009 5:00:46 AM

    Jehovah's Witnesses blood transfusion confusion

    Simple fact-The Bible does not prohibit Blood transfusions.If you are bleeding to death it is more dangerous to refuse a blood transfusions than to take one.
    Bloodless surgeries are great if they can be elective.1/3rd of all trauma deaths are from blood loss.

    Jehovah's Witnesses elders will investigate and disfellowship any Jehovah Witness who takes a blood transfusion,to say the issue is a 'personal conscience matter' is subterfuge to keep the Watchtower out of lawsuits..

    Jehovah's Witnesses children die every year worldwide due to blood transfusion ban.Rank & file Jehovah's Witness are indoctrinated to be scared to death of blood
    FYI
    1) JW's DO USE many parts aka 'fractions' aka components of blood,so if it's 'sacred' to God why the hypocritical contradiction flip-flop?

    2) They USE blood collections that are donated by Red Cross and others but don't donate back,more hypocrisy.

    3) The Watchtower promotes and praises bloodless elective surgeries,this is a great advancement indeed.BUT it's no good to me if I am bleeding to death from a car crash and lose much of my blood volume and need EMERGENCY blood transfusion.

    Remember the Jehovah's Witnesses use thousands and thousands of pints of blood donated by others.They use 60% of the blood volume as broken down "fractions" then go on Bible thumping rants about how dangerous and sinful blood transfusions are.

    ( JW do allow organ transplants which has more risk than whole blood transfusions so their arguments of disease transmission is bogus)

    Know this,the reason that JW refuse blood is because of their spin on the 3000 year old Biblical old testament,modern medicine will eventually make blood donations and transfusions a thing of the past.When this technology happens it won't vindicate the Jehovah's Witnesses and all the deaths that have occurred so far.

    The Watchtower's rules against blood transfusions will eventually be abolished (very gradually to reduce wrongful death lawsuit liability) even now most of the blood 'components' are allowed.

    They are such hypocrites!
    --
    Danny Haszard http://www.dannyhaszard.com

  • Posted By: Citizen_Jimserac @ 05/19/2009 9:37:50 PM

    THIS is what happens when the freedom of medical choice is denied and abrogated by the state. Even though chemotherapy is probably the best that medical "science" can give right now, pathetic though it may be, the mother has the RIGHT to refuse the treatment. In this case, as often happens, the cure is worse than the disease. EVEN if the cancer were to be put into remission, there is no guarantee that a year later it would not pop up again in some form or other, assurances to the contrary and quite worthless. If the Homeopaths were to offer this kind of treatment they would be roundly condemned, but instead, we have courts of law attempting to FORCE the treatment, unwanted, on the patient. I say, put a stop to this perfidy now or suffer the consequences of a totalitarian medical state - forced vaccinations, forced chemotherapies, all because it is in your "best" interest.

    Freedom of medical choice is a fundamental, however challenging it may be to the special interests in control of our health care system, for now.

    We MUST fight them. The rights of that child and parent MUST be protected, especially in these circumstances.

    • Posted By: anti-stereotype @ 05/20/2009 9:23:46 AM

      The rights of the kid? He's scared of pain and brainwashed by moron parents into believing he can avoid it, that he isn't even sick. His rights are to be informed, and since he can't even read at the age of thirteen, his parents have not provided him that right. If they had hit him, they would lose him, but they should be allowed to watch as he dies slowly of agonizing cancer, when it's known that he would respond well to treatment?

      • Posted By: 1kare @ 05/20/2009 6:14:33 PM

        I agree with you, but would like to offer another slant as well. There are many people in this world who have been cured of cancer by alternative therapies, but the doctors are NOT going to pronounce the cure rates, because then they lose money in their pockets. Do the research yourself! Watch Veria TV! Look up the Gerson Institute... and others like them. There is more help available than most people realize. I know people personally who have been cured using alternative therapies! I suggest that everyone educate themselves on nutritional healing, the validity of using sweat baths/saunas for healing and benefits of detoxifying the body from all the chemicals we are bombarded with every day. Why give over your right to health to a doctor!

        • Posted By: pastafarianism @ 05/23/2009 8:22:36 AM

          I would love to read about people who are cured using these so called "alternative remedies" without also using traditional medical techniques as well. I could be wrong but I have a hard time believing your statement without actually reading it from repuatable source...I would settle for anything peer reviewed even...

      • Posted By: alstan3 @ 05/20/2009 9:47:34 AM

        Can't read at 13? Where did you go to school?

        • Posted By: Adpacqueen @ 05/20/2009 3:39:30 PM

          The child is supposedly homeschooled and it is also noted that the child may be mentally challenged. An adult has a right to refuse treatment. But when you are talking about a minor if the state feels the child is being abused or neglected then they have a right to step in. Also I hear all the time about patient's using "religion" so they can refuse vaccinations for their children but they aren't religious at all. I???m tired of having people use religion as a crutch so they can get out of something. This alternative treatment they want the boy to have has not been proven to cure his type of cancer. I feel sorry for the child and am afraid he will die because of the decisions that his parents have made for him.

    • Posted By: pastafarianism @ 05/23/2009 8:11:30 AM

      Tin foil helmets anyone?

      Science is verifible results proven over and over again and peer reviewed to ensure accuracy of results. Parying to some unknown, all-knowing omnipotent being un the sky is illogical and requires one to take a HUGE amount of information as fact without any supporting evidence.

    • Posted By: WesternResearcher @ 05/20/2009 12:25:41 AM

      What if the parent's religion condemned lwinter coats? Would you fight for the parent's right to let their child freeze to death? And before you balk, condemning PROVEN MEDICINE (read the journals!) is just as mind-bogglingly stupid as condemning winter clothing!

      • Posted By: elizabethpaige @ 05/20/2009 8:53:29 PM

        Too much abuse in the name of religion. There was a horrific case a few years ago of a young couple who deliberately starved their baby to death. God, please tell people to go dancing instead of gettin' religion.

        • Posted By: tambelina @ 05/21/2009 2:27:53 PM

          I know the case you are referring to and it wasn't a religion that made the parents starve the baby. It was vegetarianism. Or maybe they were vegans. Either way, the parents were woefully uninformed. Sadly, there is no intelligence requirement to be a parent. Perhaps if more parents did as much research as Mrs. Hauser, we might be a whole lot healthier.

      • Posted By: bartsimpson2008 @ 05/20/2009 12:41:29 AM

        This is not about choice it is about leting a child die that does not have to.

    • Posted By: floit63 @ 05/20/2009 2:55:38 PM

      Actually, Hodkin's Lymphoma has less than a 5% chance of relapse if caught early enough. Even at the latest stage, relapse rates after treatment are around 50%. With chemo and radiation the child has every chance of living a normal, healthy life.

    • Posted By: WesternResearcher @ 05/20/2009 12:37:18 AM

      If the family's religious beliefs condemned winter clothing, would you fight for the parents right to let their child freeze to death? And before you balk and such a 'ludicrous' scenario, let me tell you that witholding a medicine that works 95% of the time (look at the original research!) is just as ludicrous! If you belive that the child isn't old enough to make his own decisions (remember yourself at that age!), then this is murder. If you belive that he is sufficiently mature, then it is assisted suicide. Oh, and the idea that is 'Christian' or 'American' to sacrifice children (or let them sacrifice themselves) is moronic and insulting to Christianity and America! P.S. Yes, the author was wrong about the JW's. Frankly, the author shouldn't have even mentioned them, since the neither the parents or children are JW's. Lets focus on the impending infanticide instead, hm?

  • Posted By: calsma1978 @ 05/20/2009 9:46:06 PM

    Have any of you who think this boy should be mandated to have chemo and radition actually SEEN the result of those procedures? It is awful. It's not just the pain from the constant IV's and bloodwork. Burns on your skin, sores in your mouth, uncontrollable nausea and vomiting, diarrhea, weight loss, fatigue, aches and pains that most of us can not imagine. Not to mention having to give up any semblance of the good life that you currently enjoy to spend weeks and months in the hospital, too sick to have visitors or even your own pets around you. Any of you want to sign up for that? When you have a strong have in God, dying is by far the worst thing that can happen to someone. I have two boys and I hope they outlive me and have wonderful, healthy lives. However, I understand how hurt these parents must be about Daniel's diagnosis. I understand why a even in the worst case senerio a "good death" might be preferable to years of chemo and radiation. I wouldn't want to be the parents having to make this decision for anything in the world but I do believe that it is their decision to make.

    • Posted By: Sansserif @ 05/21/2009 10:31:13 AM

      I have seen the results of chemo and radiation treatments on a sick child. the results are that a once dying two year old is now a perfectly healthly 7.5 year old full of personality, life, and promise. Yes the treatment was tough, but she would have DIED without it and thanks to her Doctors i have a happy healthy LIVING little sister.

      • Posted By: pastafarianism @ 05/23/2009 8:14:26 AM

        Thank you and I am glad you are so lucky; unfortunatly, most people are shortsighted and only understand the short term pain without taking into account that chemo is a life saving treatment in many cases that enables to person to lead a fuller, more productive life (not too mention a longer one) than they would have otherwise been able to if they had left the cancer untreated.

  • Posted By: JWTruth @ 05/22/2009 11:59:26 PM





    Jehovahs Witnesses are schooled in finding common ground if you like pink elephants they will become experts on pink elephants. That's the beauty of religion and superstition, it has no limits.Religion is the most profitable legal business because religions can misquote, misrepresent, and use unethical practices without fear of punishment. It's the absolute best way to scam people I have yet seen

    http://www.jwfiles.com/

  • Posted By: treinfir @ 05/22/2009 5:50:57 PM

    The article raises difficult questions. The Medical profession includes many admirable men and women dedicated to helping those less fortunate. Scientific advancements continue to improve the lives of millions.

    Yet, some procedures remain fraught with risk. Every year tens of thousands die because of medical mistakes, insufficient care, or secondary infections. A Fox news story, for example, recently highlighted that 98,000 still die in the US each year from medical mistakes:

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,520822,00.html

    Treatments, effective against one ailment, can cause side effects or damage to other organs. Millions worldwide cannot afford adequate medical care. Others are overwhelmed by the complexity of their problems and related choices, and do not know which way to turn. Eventually, we all die.

    It is also interesting how much religious hatred still exists, often directed towards sincere and peaceful people. Some pretend to be what they are not to further their attack. Others resort to demonizing or misrepresenting the beliefs of those they hate.

    Hopefully, mankind???s problems will soon be resolved; sickness and death will be no more, and the Hauser family will find peace.

  • Posted By: davismom @ 05/22/2009 4:53:04 PM

    I just want to know if the courts plan to pay for the treatments they are forcing on this family. My step father has gone through prostate cancer and my father is currently battling lung and liver cancer and they are both going broke with the costs associated with the treatments. My mother actually is back at work even though both of her knees are shot from the job she is able to get. She is actually on crutches to work. But the cost of the chemo is crazy through the roof and they have been told they will die without it, so they pay. Are the courts going to pay?

  • Posted By: pringlewoman @ 05/22/2009 3:16:59 PM

    I want my daughter to get tested and see what's going on w/ my her. I was told that they won't do it unless my family pays for it. She's 13 and the judge said she is old enough to decide where she lives. They want her to stay w/ a foster home where another foster child brought home pot and she smoked it w/ him. She was 11 yrs old at the time and he was 15 yrs old. I want my daughter to get the help she needs so she doesn't hurt herself or anyone around her. She can't handle changes in her schedule or enviroment. She also has OCD tendencies and uses hand sanitizer all the time. She doesn't like certain textures w/ her food. I'm a horrible mom because I'm labelling her. I just want her to have a normal life, yet they have put road blocks in front of me so I can't get this done.

  • Posted By: RealJW @ 05/22/2009 3:10:21 PM

    As a Jehovah's Witness who is not bitter, and who has thought a lot about the difference between a religion and a cult, I must objectively say that Jehovah's Witnesses usually get a YES vote on 1/2 to 2/3rds of the criteria generally used to identify a Cult.
    Jehovah???s Witnesses are an authoritarian cult that is obnoxious and oppressive to just about everybody 80% of all Jehovah???s Witnesses children born into the cult will leave many are disfellowshiped and the cult demand that their family shun them for life.

    Google Jehovah???s Witnesses pedophile cover-up for some disturbing facts.

  • Posted By: treinfir @ 05/22/2009 1:41:57 PM

    Why the virulent accusations against Jehovah's Witnesses? The family in this article is not associated with them.

    Jehovah's Witnesses generally accept professional medical treatment except for blood transfusions as based upon Biblical principles. Even then, they accept bloodless medical alternatives, from which many other non-witnesses also benefit.

    True, the Witnesses disfellowship members known to engage in unscriptural practices like adultery or thievery. The purpose is to keep their congregations clean, again in accordance with Biblical standards. Those disfellowshipped are free to do as they wish elsewhere. Or, they can be accepted back upon re-evidencing Christian behavior.

    As for being wolves, Witnesses believe that God is just, and does not condemn anyone to eternal torment. They are found worldwide, yet have never waged warfare or requested governmental suppression against anyone. Neither do they force their beliefs on others. Witnesses have no hired clergy with salaries or special titles, and don???t financially profit from their ministry. Admittance at their functions is always free. They have no tithing requirements nor are contribution plates ever passed. Instead, Witnesses peacefully advocate Christ's kingship and look to him for their example.

    Of course, Christ was also hated.

  • Posted By: Bunny555 @ 05/22/2009 5:00:49 AM

    People like the Watchtower society simply use a "religion" to cover up a fraudulent enterprise the same way the Mafia used restaurants.
    'Wolves in Sheep's clothing false prophets' just like Jesus himself warned about-Matthew 7:15
    The Watchtower society rules and controls individual JW's like the Vatican rules Catholics.
    The Watchtower WILL ( at least was their practice for 50 years) Ex-communicate / disfellowship any member who takes a blood transfusion.
    Attempts to deny & lie about the absolute control that the Watchtower society holds over followers is another subterfuge to try to save the corporation from lawsuits.
    Shame shame shame...

  • Posted By: newsreader15496 @ 05/21/2009 2:32:02 PM

    Let's see... The story states that "At 13, Daniel is far from the age where he could be making his own medical decisions". However, the courts have ruled that a girl of age 13 can independently make a medical decision seek a "treatment" (abortion) with or without the consent of her parents. However, this boy of age 13 cannot make a medical decision not to seek treatment for cancer?? This double standard cannot stand. It's one or the other, not both.

  • Posted By: newsreader15496 @ 05/21/2009 2:31:27 PM

    Let's see... The story states that "At 13, Daniel is far from the age where he could be making his own medical decisions". However, the courts have ruled that a girl of age 13 can independently make a medical decision seek a "treatment" (abortion) with or without the consent of her parents. However, this boy of age 13 cannot make a medical decision not to seek treatment for cancer?? This double standard cannot stand. It's one or the other, not both.

  • Posted By: treinfir @ 05/21/2009 1:17:42 PM

    Thank you Newsweek, Ms. Daily, and Dr. Diekema for correcting this story???s references to Jehovah???s Witnesses. Those continually enhancing their professional skill and knowledge are worthy of great respect.

    1. As some respondents noted, the family referenced in the article was not associated with Jehovah???s Witnesses.

    2. Jehovah???s Witnesses do not reject most medical treatments, with the noteworthy exception of blood transfusions (out of respect for Biblical requirements). In such cases, Witnesses generally seek alternative treatments that are available. Medical professionals continue to make advancements in this area to lower costs and risks of blood borne infection, immune system suppression, and blood type incompatibilities. Many non-Witnesses have also benefited from the emergence of non-blood medical alternatives.

    3. Jehovah???s Witnesses believe that their Creator is just and does not subject anyone to eternal hell fire for the shortcomings of a few years. Any Witness is glad to respectfully refute the Hellfire doctrine, which slanders Jehovah God and is based solely on misinterpretations of a few Bible illustrations/parables, and contamination from pagan religion.

  • Posted By: cbattles @ 05/21/2009 10:49:50 AM

    Let's see, judges are relying on the opinion of the American Medical Association, that notoriously inept and corrupt organization that is the lackey of the notoriously inept and corrupt pharmaceutical companies. Well, if the ads don't work, why not try coercion? Is that Gestapo footsteps I hear?

    • Posted By: choltrn @ 05/21/2009 12:22:02 PM

      Amen. You think its ok to force any particular brand of medicine on someone, remember it wasn't so long ago that "blleeding" was a standard practice in "medical science" that also killed more than it saved. God help the people who aren't sheep and actually THINK for a change. The rest of you idiots can go to your medical quack and get yourselves a good dose of poison anytime you like.

  • Posted By: avgJane @ 05/21/2009 12:09:44 PM

    You want to respect religion? Then arrest people who "sell the medicine". No true medicine man charges a fee like this fake Native American "religious group" does. It's a fraud, just like Kickapoo Indian Sagwa and Radium Water. This family is being conned and people are SUPPORTING the con artists! Thank goodness for courts and judges who can get children away from crazy parents who couldn't keep a house plant alive.

  • Posted By: Think Clearly @ 05/20/2009 7:49:32 PM

    If the courts can decide that the parents are damaging the child by not bringing him to Chemo......what about the parents that are feeding fast food to their kids daily????

  • Posted By: soncollins @ 05/21/2009 7:48:27 AM

    I have been used to the same thing - we tried everything to save our son but in the end we decided that our son had no quality of life and what little life he had left we would like to see him happy than live and be in and out of the hospital for the rest of his life. We dont know all the facts of this case so before we judge this women take a step back a minute. Doctors pestered us to make the decision that they felt was the best for our son regardless of how we felt. We actually had to get a nurse advocate for them to listen to us and respect our decision to DNR. They actually threatened to take him away from us. In the end we ended up in a hospice program and I am thankful to that nurse. Emotionally I wanted my son to continue livng, morally I couldnt justify myselfish needs to keep him alive with what he was living through.

    It is my firm opinion that there are worse things in this world than death. I feel she is making the best decision for her and her son and probably the most compasionate thing for him. To me the medical profession has gone to far.

  • Posted By: Effstick @ 05/20/2009 11:46:02 PM

    The Last time I bothered to check, medical credentials were not issued when a judge was sworn in to office, not to mention the court's (yes, court in lowercase, it's beneath contempt) blatant disregard of the family's religious beliefs. In the end, it matters not, we're all going to die, some deserve it more than others, I.E. certain sanctimonious prick judges and throw in the lawyers while you're at it. The kid's going to die, let him decide how he wants to live.

    • Posted By: Harley962 @ 05/21/2009 7:34:27 AM

      You sound as if we may have walked the same path at some point in this lifetime. Your description of courts (definately lower case) and the jesters who preside over them mirror my feelings on the subject. Our purpose, our job, if you will, in this lifetime is to walk the road to forever learning the lessons we must learn to move on to the next level. Death marks our success, our completion of our tasks here. We get to move up a square. Its all good. Ronald Reagan said that the scariest words we can hear are , " I'm from the government and I'm here to help." The man had his finger on the pulse and he has moved on. We should be able to decide for ourselves how we want to walk life's highway. No one should feel they have the right to order me to run when today I want to skip! I wish the boy and his mom well. However it works out should be up to them.

  • Posted By: JWTruth @ 05/21/2009 3:30:52 AM

    Artificial blood in 10-20 years but not ready yet.

    I DON???T want somebody else???s blood in me I DON"T want somebody else???s organs in me either. BOTH are risky and can carry disease,but if I need or will die I will take. There is NO substitute for whole blood yet. There is no substitute for a liver yet either.

    BTW-The Jehovah's Witnesses had less to do with 'pioneering' bloodless surgeries and it had more to do with the scarcity of blood.The red cross makes $25 on a unit of blood the red cross will be happy when artificial blood is here for good of all.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse