Daniel Hauser, 13, is dying of cancer and needs chemotherapy. However, his mother, Colleen Hauser of Sleepy Eye, Minnesota, is in court this week fighting the treatment on religious grounds. Hauser has Hodgkin’s lymphoma, but the family is against modern treatment on religious grounds and believes in healing cancer with herbs and vitamins . . . and prayer.
Colleen Hauser says that she learned about alternative healing techniques “on the Internet.”
She insists on the treatment (and says that her son agrees) despite the fact that (without treatment) his survival chances will drop to 5 percent.
Natural-health advocates have been at the court to support the family and Dan Zwakman, a member of the Nemenhah religious group to which family belongs, has spoken for the family. He has emphasized the group’s motto: “our religion is our medicine.”
This is an all too familiar case of parents putting their children a great risk due to religious beliefs — forcing courts to intervene. Unfortunately, many of these cases do not involve the courts until after the death of the child in the form of criminal charges against the parents, here.
For the full story, click here.
Mespo:
I have no idea as we are not given the full plan dosages, types of supplements etc.
I have read works by doctors that are not in the mainstream of cancer treatments that do accept high doses of fruits and vegetables and certain supplements as legitimate means of treating cancer.
I have also read that all spontaneous remissions of cancer can be traced to a very high fever on the level of about 105 F and that German doctors use this form of treatment.
I have a good deal of contact with the legal profession because my daughter has CF and they are very hide bound and one way. For example it took many years for nutrition to be an accepted way to prevent certain diseases. Or for the food pyramid to be revamped.
With all that being said there are some very powerful biological pharmaceuticals. For example I would not recommend making tea with any plant in the Foxglove (Digitalis purpurea (Scrophulariaceae) family
BRON98:
“What if they went to a doctor and he approved their regime? Would you be satisfied then?”
************
If they did that it would meet the test of reasonableness and that is precisely why we license physicians and hold them accountable for their actions. Parents are their child’s guardians not their keepers. BTW do you honestly think any MD would agree with this treatment plan?
Mespo:
Obviously leaving a child in a hot car is deleterious to the childs health. But so is feeding a child too many sweets albeit in different ways but we dont have the cookie police (yet).
What if they went to a doctor and he approved their regime? Would you be satisfied then?
Mespo:
Then the parents are very misguided/ignorant, but should the courts step in? And do they have a right to interfere?
If the government gets into the business of saving stupid people from themselves it wont have time to do anything else.
Bron98:
In this case, we’re not talking physicians, we’re talking religion. “Dan Zwakman, a member of the Nemenhah religious group to which family belongs, has spoken for the family. He has emphasized the group’s motto: “our religion is our medicine.”
If it were the law, I’d worry but it isn’t. Here the parents are doing nothing more than the Witch Doctor would do, and the child suffers. It’s the old canard about letting the family decide what’s best for the child. It only works if the family is responsible. When they’re not, society steps in to protect the child. It’s like arguing that I have the right to leave my child in a hot car during the summer with the windows up because I deem it acceptable. Sorry your rights end at the safety of your child who cannot decide for himself.
Mespo:
I think we are talking about licensed physicians, last I heard we don’t license witch doctors in this country at least not yet. Although who knows maybe in a few years so we can bring health care costs under control. I think witch doctors would work for a couple of chickens or a goat.
Mespo:
how would you feel if your daughter was forced to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term because it was in the best interest of the child?
lottakatz:
As I stated above if the child is under the supervision of a physcian and this is a case of the court compelling the parents to adopt one form of treatment over another then it is a violation of rights. The courts do not (yet) and should not have the power to choose doctors and treatments for an individual. There are effective alternative cancer treatments and it is up to the individual to take those decisions and it is up to the parents to take the decision for a minor.
When the religous right takes over and you are compelled to carry a child to term because it is best for the child please remember this post.
Bron98:
“The courts do not have the right to tell an individual they may not seek alternative treatments.”
*******************
Wonder if you’d feel the same way if the alternate treatment for the child was a Witch Doctor?
LK,
Magnificent story!. I hadn’t thought about Spinrad in years.
Easy to see why Ellison selected it given his proclivities for the weird. Both Ellison and Spinrad had been guests on NYC’s
Long John Nebel radio show. Asimov and L.Ron Hubbard also appeared a few times. Two of his regulars guests and friend were Lester Del Rey and Fred Pohl. Reading Spinrad again, late at night, waiting to pick up friends coming in on a Red Eye, brought back many pleasant memories of my youth. Spinrad’s take on creative visualization was a droll gem.
The problem Bron is that the patient is not a legal individual. He is also not entirely the property of his parents. If it was one of the parents making a decision about their own care there wouldn’t be a court case. I too believe in individual rights and know exactly how I’d like my life to end (mobility and awareness willing) when that time comes but I wouldn’t presume to impose that or withhold it from a sick relative, it’s a matter of individual rights.
If the son lives to the age of emancipation with conventional treatment and then wants to stop that treatment it’s his right as a legal individual. Treating him is actually for the state to preserve his opportunity to make an individual decision.
——————
Mike, Way back I read a neat little short story by Norman Spinrad named ‘Carcinoma Angels’ in a compilation put together by Harlen Ellison in 1967. The full text is at:
http://www.scifi.com/scifiction/classics/classics_archive/spinrad/spinrad1.html
and it plays nicely into your ‘imaging’ therapy remarks. It kinda’ falls into the ‘be careful what you as for’ category of writing but it was ’67 after all.
“She said they prefer natural remedies such as herbs and vitamins.”
“He argued that this is a case about religious freedom, noting that the group’s motto is “our religion is our medicine.”
Bron,
Those two quotes are from the original story. She (the mother)found those herbs and vitamins on the Internet. The second quote though tells it all. Their method is not alternative/unorthodox treatment, it is prayer. If my kid had been given a 5% chance of survival without chemo, I’m giving it chemo, whatever my religious beliefs are. This is child abuse and I believe that the Courts must step in to prevent it.
Christian Science and their ilk was, is and always has been quackery of the most pernicious sort. If you’re an adult and you want to play that game, be my guest. If you’re a 13 year old kid with crazy parents, I’m for them being compelled to do the right thing.
You might know from other posts that I am not an enemy of alternative medicine and there is much there that I think has merit. I even use some herbal remedies. However, as one with disability and a wife who scours the Internet trying to keep me alive, let me say that there is also a lot of BS out there, that simply represents the long time American scam of Patent Medicines.
MikeS:
maybe the chemo is child abuse. There are other methods for treating cancer and from what I have read they are effective. If this is a determination by the courts as to what treatment is required then I disagree with you. If the parents are not under the care of a physician and are going about this willy nilly then I agree with you.
The courts do not have the right to tell an individual they may not seek alternative treatments.
“In my conservative handbook individual rights take priority. (and yes I understand that my rights end at your property line and no I am not an anarchis but a limited goevernment type.)”
Bron,
Here’s the problem I have with your formulation: The kid is 13. If his parents were beating him with a whip the government would and should have the right to step in. Anyone who reaches the age considered legally mature should not be compelled to take any treatment. When you’re dealing with a minor, I consider this to be child abuse.
Does the state have a right to intervene?
I say no, isn’t this a case of separation of church and state? No matter how stupid this may be isn’t it up to the individual to decide what is right for their family?
What will be next, telling parents they cant feed their children cookies and potato chips in the name of universal health care?
I don’t agree with what the parents are doing but it is up to them is it not?
Also there are many alternatives to chemotherapy but then that gets into a whole other issue about the cancer “lobby”. So these parents may be doing the right thing actually. There was a case of a young man a few years ago in either NC or VA that refused chemo because it made him very sick and his parents rejected further treatment and treated him with non-traditional methods and the last I heard he was doing very well. So these parents are not totally out in left field and the state has no right to make this type of decision for them.
On the one hand you all are for individual rights and on the other you are not, which is it? Individual rights or state control of our lives, you cant have it both ways. It is either one way or the other. We are either a free people in charge of our individual destinies or we are wards of the state, subject to the artful fancies of faceless bureaucrats with no responsibility for their thoughts or actions.
In my conservative handbook individual rights take priority. (and yes I understand that my rights end at your property line and no I am not an anarchis but a limited goevernment type.)
Mespo,
While licensed parenthood will never fly, it is a damned good idea. I do believe that creative imagery can have an effect on cancer and that could be called prayer by another name. The woman who ran my Psychotherapeutic Training Institute had inoperable stomach cancer more than 30 years ago. While she received the best state of the art medical care, her husband was a doctor on staff at Columbia Presbyterian, she also had other therapists with her around the clock leading her in creative imagery exercises. Such as imagining the battle in her body against the cancer and supervising the war against it. She survived and felt that some of that was due to the imagery work. I myself do it with my heart, but at the same time I see the best Doctors I can and follow their instructions and treatment.
So I do think that whatever you call it imagery, meditation and prayer can be helpful. The trouble with these and other parents of their ilk is that they are too enraptured in their
beliefs to see the clear and needed alternatives. The court should step in, or these people if they are self aware enough, are in for a lifetime of sadness.
It has always been a curiosity to me that you have a state-issued license (and demonstrate the required proficiency) to operate a car, but to have and raise a child requires no sense at all. Proof again we’ve got it backwards.
Maybe we should pray for the right thing to happen for this child. Whatever that maybe.