Court Overrules Parents in Religious Refusal of Chemotherapy for 13-Year-Old Boy

thumb_praying_handsMinnesota Judge John Rodenberg has ruled in the case of Daniel Hauser, 13. We discussed this case earlier regarding the religious objections that the parents raised to chemotherapy for Daniel’s cancer –even though he has a 90 percent chance of survival with the treatment and little or no change of survival without it.


Daniel has Hodgkin’s lymphoma, which is now considered a highly treatable form of cancer. In his
58-page ruling, Rodenberg found that Daniel has been “medically neglected” and is in need of child protection services. He wrote ” “Brown County (Minnesota) Family services has demonstrated a compelling state interest in the life and welfare of Daniel Hauser sufficient to override the fundamental constitutional rights of both parents and Daniel to the free exercise of religion and the due process right of the parents to direct the religious and other upbringing of the child.”

Daniel opposed the treatment and his court-appointed criticized the ruling, saying
“It marginalizes the decisions that parents face every day in regard to their children’s medical care. It really affirms the role that big government is better at making our decisions for us.”

For the full story, click here and here.

59 thoughts on “Court Overrules Parents in Religious Refusal of Chemotherapy for 13-Year-Old Boy”

  1. Let’s keep the government out of our business, especially parents trying to do what they think is best for their child. The ‘doctors’ have a vested interest in chemo; it produces money for everyone in the health cre system, and it’s agonizing. No judge has any right to intervene. If this family had money, there would be no issue because it would be a private matter like it should be for everyone.

  2. I just saw that article myself Buddha. This story just keeps getting more and more interesting.

    I think I see a future “Without a Trace” episode in the making. That or a “Law and Order” episode.

  3. As a parent, who thankfully never faced a situation like this, all I can say is if its’ my kid and the prognosis is good then the child gets the Chemo, despite the child’s objections. If we’re talking a bout a 10% chance of success then I’d honor the child’s wishes. In this instance the chance of success seems way over 50% and parents who won’t do it are guilty of neglect.

  4. Does anyone else find it curious that the family joined the religious group AFTER their son decided he didn’t want more chemotherapy? Seems like they were searching for a reason, rather than having a valid claim of religious beliefs.

  5. Well after reading the last and the attack on Buddha, oh well. My point is made and made well.

  6. AY,
    I have suffered some slings and arrows, but also too understand that there are some that hide theirs, not talking about you, in seeming sweetness and light. Patty does get a little top carried away for my taste, but she has also been stuck with more than a few barbs, although shot less directly.
    With Patty at least you know where she stands and that I appreciate, while I dislike the overkill.

  7. Mike S.

    I was speaking of the trolls, when speaking of baiting the baitable.

    Bron, I can assure you I am not. I hope you can see I have my own style of writing, posting or whatever. I have been slammed by Patty C for using periods where I should have used a comma. I know I did point out to her that I am guilty of the same, but that if she is going to look at the gramatics then she must look at her own, as I did read past poster and the Prof is sometimes a slouch as well.

    The inaneness of her comments are unmerited in most cases. I read through the blawg of Friday and she was insulting to FF LEO for no reason at all. Just because she disagreed with what he had to say. I think that a lot of people here are unhappy with the tyranny of a few or even one.

    It is the self centered justification that we complain of the Bush/Cheney Reicht. Cannot that be seen here as well? We are not in grade school nor are we currying favors of anyone or at least I am not. We have to use our social and moral compass to over come what has become common place and not necessarily correct but accepted because it is easier to do that buck the trend.

    I am not aware if you have suffered the wrath and indignation as well I see some feel that it is their divine right to correct and acidictly comment on what someone else, a regular has posted. Now they may have social discourse off of this site that I am not aware of. But from what I have seen, it is unwarranted and unmerited in all if not most instances. Do you not agree?

  8. I must say the best steak I ever had was corn fed Nebraska Beef, at a restaurant named Dreisbach’s in Grand Island, Nebraska. Going cross country in 1975 and having traveled for ten boring hours my ex wife and I stopped at Grand Island, found a motel and went to dinner at this place. As a steak lover and aficionado I thought the best porterhouse I’ve ever had was at Peter Luger’s, in NYC. Dreisbach’s and that corn fed Nebraska beef topped it. We liked it so much that 6 weeks later, on our way back from the Left coast, we stopped at Grand Island again and the steak was just as good. Just googled it and found out the restaurant is still in business.

  9. AY,
    Florida is Texas with better weather and nicer beaches. I prefer NYC but can no longer afford it. Also I seem to be healthier down here.

  10. “Buddha,
    I am having fun baiting the baitable. One can only live for this clean clear conscience fun.”

    AY,

    Intentional sadism in any form is not attractive, no matter how much fun it gives someone, except for those mutually consenting adults for who it’s a sexual predilection. We ban the baiting of bears for its’ cruelty, why should the baiting of humans be fun? I’m not getting all self-righteous on you, because I’ve done a bit of baiting myself and have felt that same guilty pleasure. However, after I’ve done it I’ve regretted the acts as being disappointing in that they were beneath the standards that I hold for myself.

    I arrived at this site during Bartleby’s hey day and that character was as insidious, as it was insincere. While I think you and Bron are just you and Bron, I understand Patty’s wariness. Her inherent point was that Bartleby held sway because he was taken seriously and treated with courtesy by some on the site, thus perpetuating its’ disruptive presence.

    As Buddha implied in an eloquent post on another thread today, this site is an important tool in prosecuting the battle against anti-constitutional behavior and attacks on civil liberties. What the Professor does on TV, in the classroom and in Court are not only acts of truth, but acts of courage. Our support here assists him in his endeavors. Buddha also clearly pleaded for the understanding that part of our function here is to draw people into a discussion of the issues Jonathan raises, to increase the numbers of those who understand the issues and are willing to fight for our liberties. The trolls are aware of this and try their best to disrupt the effort by turning people off to the discussion. We need to not assist them in their work.

  11. That is telling them Mike S. I was going to comment, but I did not want to get trounced on by anyone.

    So how is Florida?

  12. Mespo727272,

    Are you here today? Have not heard near a peep out of you. Now, if I said that to Buddha, he would be down at the booth. You see thats all they have to do in Kansas in the summer time.

    Buddha,

    Now where exactly did that beef come from by the time it gets to Kansas? Oh yeah it started in Texas. Don’t for get it. You all just got to keep all of them lonely cowboys after the Trail. I think Kansas was the filming of Broken Back Cowboy. Are you lonesome tonight?

    Now for your ex nah, kinda like family, If she ain’t good nuff for you, she ain’t good nuff for me. You can’t try and trick me and pawn her off on me.

    Disclaimer.

    The above was only meant as insulting to Buddha and Buddha alone. If others have read this and are offended, it was at your own risk. Buddha, I was only kiddin. I thin you and I could be great friends outside of this blawg thing. Only if it did not cost too much.

  13. I see Patty’s Paranoid, no one attacks her until she does her indignant righteousness flopping. Attacking most without provocation. Blaming men for her lack of self esteem and own flatulence. Blaming others for being on the Blawg as the source of her discomfort and it was a fine list until, so and so came on here and then it is about some imagined or perceived assault against her or or profession or education or her garden or her dog or her. . . the list could go on an on. . . .

    It is not about her and a substantial time has been taken away from other issues just because Jill Posts or FF LEO asks her to quite down and she trys and shut him down.

    If she has as much education as she claims she would be smarter than this and not even be on here. She would be way, way too good for us.

  14. Buddha,

    I am having fun baiting the baitable. One can only live for this clean clear conscience fun.

Comments are closed.