Poll: Is the government in the right?
Poll Options
View poll results: Is the government in the right?
Yes, she's not capable of such a decision
25 38%
No, it's her choice to make
31 47%
Unsure
10 15%
Voters: 66.
Page 1 of 6
#1
http://www.foxnews.com/health/2015/01/08/connecticut-supreme-court-upholds-ruling-that-teen-must-undergo-chemo/


The Connecticut Supreme Court upheld a prior ruling Thursday that a 17-year-old cancer patient cannot refuse chemotherapy treatment for Hodgkin's lymphoma.

The state argued that the teen lacked competency extended to maturity and that they did not believe she understood the severity of her prognosis. Her mother and her mother's lawyer said they expect to go back to trial court to more fully explore the mature minor argument.

Cassandra ran away after two treatments in November and, with the support of her mother, refused any more when she returned. After the hospital reported Cassandra’s mother, Jackie Fortin, the Connecticut Department of Children and Families (DCF) took temporary custody of the teen, and her mother was ordered to cooperate with medical care administered under the agency’s supervision.

The teen believes the chemotherapy will do more damage to her body than the cancer will, according to the Hartford Courant. Doctors have said the teen has an 80 to 85 percent chance of living -- with six months of chemotherapy treatment, according to Fox News’ legal analyst Peter Johnson Jr.

The teen’s doctors testified at a trial court hearing after which the DCF was authorized to make medical decisions on her behalf. The teen and her mother appealed the ruling, claiming it violates their constitutional right and that the state should recognize the “mature minor doctrine.”

The doctrine permits a minor who exhibits the maturity of an adult to make decisions reserved for those who attained the age of majority, meaning 18. Cassandra turns 18 in September. Johnson, who himself battled Hodgkin's disease at age 18, disagrees that it should apply to Cassandra.

“The family is wrong on the law, and wrong on the ethics, and wrong on the humanity,” he told Fox & Friends’ Peter Doocy.

“Wrong on the law, first of all, the state of Connecticut has an obligation to preserve life of an infant. The state of Connecticut has an obligation to prevent suicide. If she does not get this treatment, this is a form of suicide, and frankly the American Civil Liberties Union is complicit in her death if she dies,” Johnson said.

“Do 16- and 17-year-old children have the judgment, the perspective, the discretion, the experience to be making these life and death decisions? I say they do not,” Johnson said.



Do you think the government should force someone to undergo chemo? At what line of age does the line draw?

I think, while her choice is misguided, it's her choice to make. The line between 17 and 18 is arbitrary here
Quote by beadhangingOne
What happened to Snake?

Snake?

Snake?

SNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKE?!


Quote by TunerAddict
you can take my mouse and keyboard from my cold, slightly orange from cheetos, dead fingers


Quote by Baby Joel
Isis is amazing
#2
I think she can do what she wants

If she wants to die, she can die.

If she doesn't, ok.

Simple
ayy lmao
#4
judge can **** himself

to assume that she will assuredly die without chemo is not his call to make, he is not a doctor and i feel his experience with the disease has clouded his judgment
Quote by yellowfrizbee
What does a girl have to do to get it in the butt thats all I ever wanted from you. Why, Ace? Why? I clean my asshole every night hoping and wishing and it never happens.
Bitches be Crazy.

▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬ஜ۩۩ஜ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
#5
Quote by bradulator
She can make her own decisions when she's 18. She's not a doctor.

Doctors aren't there to make decisions for you.
Quote by Carmel
I can't believe you are whoring yourself out like that.

ಠ_ಠ
#6
Quote by Neo Evil11
Doctors aren't there to make decisions for you.

When you're a minor and you go to the doctor they are.
#7
Quote by bradulator
When you're a minor and you go to the doctor they are.

Surely your parent is?
Quote by Carmel
I can't believe you are whoring yourself out like that.

ಠ_ಠ
#8
Quote by Neo Evil11
Surely your parent is?

Cancer is life-threatening which means if a doctor knows about it he can't just say "oh okay"
#9
And do we really want to open the door to crappy parents refusing medical care for their child? That's like religious nutjob stuff.
#11
Quote by bradulator
Cancer is life-threatening which means if a doctor knows about it he can't just say "oh okay"

Sure he can. If the treatments are shit and there is still a chance to die, I don't see why a doctor should get the authority force someone to go through those treatments.
Quote by Carmel
I can't believe you are whoring yourself out like that.

ಠ_ಠ
#12
Quote by Neo Evil11
Sure he can. If the treatments are shit and there is still a chance to die, I don't see why a doctor should get the authority force someone to go through those treatments.

"The teen believes the chemotherapy will do more damage to her body than the cancer will, according to the Hartford Courant. Doctors have said the teen has an 80 to 85 percent chance of living -- with six months of chemotherapy treatment"

But yeah there's a 15-20 percent chance it doesn't work and she still dies so might as well just not do it. Did she fail math class?
#13
Quote by chookiecookie
I think she can do what she wants

If she wants to die, she can die.

If she doesn't, ok.

Simple


Did you read? It says she thinks the chemo will do more damage to her body than CANCER ITSELF. This article also implies that she is not seeking any different treatment methods. She doesn't seem like she understands, and she clearly isn't "choosing to die."

Quote by Acϵ♠
judge can **** himself

to assume that she will assuredly die without chemo is not his call to make, he is not a doctor and i feel his experience with the disease has clouded his judgment


Ah yes you're right I'm sure the cancer will just go away of its own accord

#14
Quote by bradulator
"The teen believes the chemotherapy will do more damage to her body than the cancer will, according to the Hartford Courant. Doctors have said the teen has an 80 to 85 percent chance of living -- with six months of chemotherapy treatment"

But yeah there's a 15-20 percent chance it doesn't work and she still dies so might as well just not do it. Did she fail math class?

It's not a problem of misinterpreting percentages but off assessing the value of your life in different cases. I had to help doctors present people with the right choices based on their own preferences (the patient's preferences). It's not always the chemo that gives the highest quality of life.
Quote by Carmel
I can't believe you are whoring yourself out like that.

ಠ_ಠ
#16
If you say the line between 17 and 18 is arbitrary, so's the one between 17 and 16, 16 and 15, 15 and 14, etc. The line's gotta be somewhere.

I meant to vote for the first option btw.
Quote by jakesmellspoo
ooh look at me i'm ERIKLENSHERR and i work at fancy pants desk jobs and wear ties and ply barely legal girls with weed and booze i'm such a classy motherfucker.
Last edited by ErikLensherr at Jan 9, 2015,
#17
State should give her the chemo. **** this 'mature minor' shit.

Edit:^exactly
Check out my band Disturbed
#18
Why exactly are the parents not allowed to decide this?
Quote by Carmel
I can't believe you are whoring yourself out like that.

ಠ_ಠ
#19
On one hand, lymphoma is one of the most treatable/curable cancers with a really high rate of survival. I think a lot of pseudoscience and erroneous beliefs surround cancer treatment, and there's a frightening amount of people who believe that all they need are vitamins or green smoothies to cure their cancer and thus conventional treatment is harmful. Being 17, this girl probably doesn't realize what sort of situation she's facing.

But it's not like being 18 or even 21 would mean she suddenly is mature enough to make those decisions.

Imo, if someone doesn't want to get treatment, no one should be forced to, regardless of their reasons.
#20
I'm torn on the issue but I will say the girl is a complete ****ing idiot (as well as her mom) and should just deal with the chemo instead of trying "alternative medicines" like she's gonna put a crystal on her forehead and meditate the cancer away or some shit
Last edited by GuitarGod_92 at Jan 9, 2015,
#21
yeah i think this is a good thing. people younger than 18 should not be making life changing medical decisions. i should know, i am younger than 18 and make lots of bad life changing medical decisions.
banned
#23
well suicide is illegal, her refusing chemo is practically suicide...also I heard she didn't want chemo because she didn't want her hair to fall out..
#24
If she doesn't want treatment then she shouldn't be forced treatment. Maybe she already knows chemo is shit and would rather live the rest of her life, short or not, without it and without her parents having to carry the financial burden if she may not even survive.


Chemo doesn't always work. My uncle wished he hadn't done it for the two years he did it when he was going to die anyway and the chemo actually made everything worse and made the cancer eventually spread to his brain.
#25
I feel strongly that they should've followed the patient's wishes. On the other hand, she is 17. Not to say that a 17 year old wouldn't be able to handle this kind of decision. But whether I agree with her decision or not (by the way, I'd have taken the chemotherapy), there has to be a line drawn somewhere. It's an imperfect system, but unless someone could suggest some kind of way to determine competency for minors that isn't messy and convoluted, I'll side with the age factor.
#26
Quote by Wormholes
If she doesn't want treatment then she shouldn't be forced treatment. Maybe she already knows chemo is shit and would rather live the rest of her life, short or not, without it and without her parents having to carry the financial burden if she may not even survive.


Chemo doesn't always work. My uncle wished he hadn't done it for the two years he did it when he was going to die anyway and the chemo actually made everything worse and made the cancer eventually spread to his brain.

what are statistics
#27
I fully support the right of stupid people to kill themselves.
"If God exists, there's no way he is French" - Andrea Pirlo

S A D B O Y S
#28
i don't understand where people get the feeling that they should have any authority over whether someone willingly takes a risk like this or not. do they just want her to pay the medical bills or something? it's one thing to persuade, maybe even proclaim that she's an idiot, but this is something else entirely.
Quote by archerygenious
Jesus Christ since when is the Pit a ****ing courtroom...

Like melodic, black, death, symphonic, and/or avant-garde metal? Want to collaborate? Message me!
#29
She may not have the right to refuse chemo but certainly her parents do. Refusing chemo isn't akin to suicide, that's a ridiculous assertion. I watched my dad suffer through almost a year of chemo and radiation before losing the battle, and while I wouldn't take back a goddamn second of the time I had with him, even when he was in bad shape, I'm sympathetic to fearing chemo and the bodily damage it can do.
For Frodo!
Quote by jrcsgtpeppers
No because a world full of marbles silly man is just as real as a half empty glass of microwaved nesquik.
#31
I don't think it's fair to compare this to other instances of parents making bad decisions regarding the health of their children. There's a huge difference between chemo and other, more simple procedures, like getting vaccinated, or going to physical therapy. Hell, even surgery is less painful and life-altering than chemotherapy.

There's obviously no way they'll find a "better" alternative, but I can't really bring myself to calling her stupid because she doesn't want to go through the physical and emotional pain of chemo. It's brutal. The article makes it seem like they're seeking homeopathy as an alternative, but I don't think comparing chemotherapy to filling your body with poison is an indication of home-remedy hippy thinking. It's literally poison.

Also, what the hell? She's a minor, so she can't make decisions, but her name is pasted all over the article? That's some double standard bullshit.
#32
Quote by TheChaz
What happened to having the right to do what you want with your body?


Apparently you don't. We need to start arresting people for buying beer and cigarettes too since it's suicide.
#33
Quote by TheChaz
What happened to having the right to do what you want with your body?

fuck freedom, she will probs look back on this on 20 years and be like "that was really stupid of me i could have died"
banned
#34
Quote by deadsmileyface
fuck freedom, she will probs look back on this on 20 years and be like "that was really stupid of me i could have died"

So people should be allowed to do whatever they want unless it's a stupid decision?
#35
Quote by deadsmileyface
fuck freedom, she will probs look back on this on 20 years and be like "that was really stupid of me i could have died"

Or she'll survive, grow her hair back out, get knocked up at 19, have three kids, get a divorce, lose two of her children in a car accident, and look back and wish that she had just died at 17 so none of that would've happened.

Don't act like you can predict the future. There's still a chance the chemo won't even save her.
#37
Quote by stratkat
She shouldn't be forced treatment if both her and guardian refuse it.

Though I'd get it done if promised an 4/5 chance of living.

actually her mother is not her guardian, she is under the custody of the state. because of that and the fact that she is not 18, she cannot legally make this decision.
banned
#38
Quote by TheChaz
So people should be allowed to do whatever they want unless it's a stupid decision?

the point here is that she's not legally old enough to make this kind of decision so idk what everyone's arguing about. should we just get rid of the drinking and smoking ages then?
banned
#39
Quote by captaincrunk
we do arrest 17 year olds for that

#merica

Quote by deadsmileyface
actually her mother is not her guardian, she is under the custody of the state. because of that and the fact that she is not 18, she cannot legally make this decision.

Is that actually mentioned in the article or did you read that from another source?

Edit: Nevermind. It says that right at the beginning. That's some pretty circular logic though. "You didn't want treatment so you're under our care now. You're under our care now, so you have to get treatment."
Last edited by archangels at Jan 9, 2015,
#40
Quote by deadsmileyface
fuck freedom, she will probs look back on this on 20 years and be like "that was really stupid of me i could have died"


but with freedom, in 20 years she won't be alive to think "that was really stupid of me, why didn't you stop me" so everything is fine
Quote by archerygenious
Jesus Christ since when is the Pit a ****ing courtroom...

Like melodic, black, death, symphonic, and/or avant-garde metal? Want to collaborate? Message me!