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.The teen, who is identified in court documents as “Cassandra C.,” but was identified by police as Cassandra Callender in a November missing persons report, was diagnosed with Hodgkin’s lymphoma in September. At the time, doctors at the Connecticut Children’s Medical Center (CCMC) recommended she receive chemotherapy.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.After the arguments Thursday, Fortin said she would not allow her daughter to die. The single mother said she and her daughter want to seek alternative treatments that don't include putting the "poison" of chemotherapy into her daughter's body."This is her decision and her rights, which is what we are here fighting about," Fortin said. "We should have choices about what to do with our bodies."Fortin and her lawyer said they are considering the next step after losing the case.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.
I've changed my position. She absolutely needs to have this treatment. I refuse to tolerate people needlessly dying in the name of "alternative" medicine.
I agree with the mother, it is still (and should be) ultimately their choice on what to do
Plus, wouldn't that mean less stupid people advocating alternative medicine then?
Quote from: aTALLmidget on January 08, 2015, 05:51:54 PMPlus, wouldn't that mean less stupid people advocating alternative medicine then?We call them stupid for a reason.
And they die for a reason, too
Quote from: aTALLmidget on January 08, 2015, 05:51:07 PMI agree with the mother, it is still (and should be) ultimately their choice on what to doIt'd be different if she wanted to die. But she doesn't--she just thinks the actual treatment will be more harmful than the cancer, which is a fucking stupid thing to say. It's essentially a mild delusion--an informational deficit--and in an instance like this it's perfectly okay for the State to coerce them into this, because it's commensurate with their desires and somebody's life is also on the line.
Quote from: aTALLmidget on January 08, 2015, 05:54:24 PMAnd they die for a reason, tooThe girl's worth more to society alive. Flipping my burgers in McDonald's facilitates more value that not existing.
I may not agree with how they are going about treating the cancer or their reasons why, but should it not ultimately be up to them in the end on what they want to do without government interference? I mean in a way, who cares what they choose to do about it - they decided to be foolish and try some cheap voodoo shit and they paid the price. Why is that the business of the government, no matter the deficits?
Eh, maybe. Her death could be a valued lesson, too
Quote from: Meta Cognition on January 08, 2015, 05:56:14 PMQuote from: aTALLmidget on January 08, 2015, 05:54:24 PMAnd they die for a reason, tooThe girl's worth more to society alive. Flipping my burgers in McDonald's facilitates more value that not existing.Eh, maybe. Her death could be a valued lesson, too
It's funny because we don't flip burgers in McDonald's
Quote from: Naru (っ◕‿◕)っ on January 08, 2015, 07:10:43 PMIt's funny because we don't flip burgers in McDonald'sYou will if I ever roll around. I fucking make you flip those burgers. I'll fucking watch you flip those burgers, you cunt-smothering spatula-faggot.
I fucking make you flip those burgers.
Quote from: Meta Cognition on January 08, 2015, 07:12:27 PMQuote from: Naru (っ◕‿◕)っ on January 08, 2015, 07:10:43 PMIt's funny because we don't flip burgers in McDonald'sYou will if I ever roll around. I fucking make you flip those burgers. I'll fucking watch you flip those burgers, you cunt-smothering spatula-faggot.But the machine does it...
Quote from: Naru (っ◕‿◕)っ on January 08, 2015, 07:13:17 PMQuote from: Meta Cognition on January 08, 2015, 07:12:27 PMQuote from: Naru (っ◕‿◕)っ on January 08, 2015, 07:10:43 PMIt's funny because we don't flip burgers in McDonald'sYou will if I ever roll around. I fucking make you flip those burgers. I'll fucking watch you flip those burgers, you cunt-smothering spatula-faggot.But the machine does it...WALL-E CAN STILL USE A FUCKING SPATULA, CAN'T HE?
Quote from: Ἀπόλλων on January 08, 2015, 07:14:49 PMIt's grammatically correct. "I make people nervous.""I make people fetch me water." "I make people stick their fingers in my bum while a fuck sheep."
It would be if you were telling him you make him in the present tense