Judge rules family can't refuse chemo for boy - page 5

MINNEAPOLIS – A Minnesota judge ruled Friday that a 13-year-old cancer patient must be evaluated by a doctor to determine if the boy would benefit from restarting chemotherapy over his parents'... Read More

  1. by   libnat
    Doctors, think nurses, he is going to be a joy.

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090519/...d.s4YLL5BvzwcF

    Doctors face tough task with boy who refuses chemo

    MINNEAPOLIS – A 13-year-old boy's vow to resist chemotherapy by punching or kicking anyone who tries to force it on him will present doctors with a tough task if they can't change his mind.
    A judge was due Tuesday to hear the results of his order that Daniel Hauser undergo a chest X-ray and his family pick an oncologist to be treated for Hodgkin's lymphoma.
    "It can be very difficult to treat a 13-year-old boy who doesn't want to be treated," said Arthur Caplan, chair of the medical ethics department at the University of Pennsylvania. "I don't want to say it's impossible, but it makes it very tough on the doctors."
  2. by   futuremombabynurse
    It's cases like this that make families like mine not be taken seriously. Believe it or not, there are intelligent people out there that know the difference between using peppermint oil to treat a stuffy nose and CHEMOTHERAPY.

    It seems there's more to this story than just the parents refusing treatment. With or without a learning disability, a 13-year-old should be able to read. There seems to be other kinds of neglect going on in this house for the sake of their beliefs. (The fact that the founder of the system has been charged with fraud doesn't make the case any stronger). Someone needs to sit down with this kid, away from the parents, and really *truly* explain what is going on. Then let him decide. If he still refuses treatment after he understands the implications...that's his choice. But right now, I tend to side more with the judge.

    But for the record, not all people who use alternative therapies are complete :lol_hitti .
  3. by   libnat
    Apparently dads okay with treatment now and mom ran off with the kid.

    Arrest ordered for mom of boy, 13, resisting chemo

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090519/...s_forced_chemo

    NEW ULM, Minn. – Authorities sought to arrest the mother of a 13-year-old boy with cancer who refuses chemotherapy after she fled with her son and missed a court hearing Tuesday on his welfare. A judge issued an arrest warrant and ordered that Daniel Hauser be placed in a foster home and be sent for an immediate examination by a pediatric oncologist so he can get treated for Hodgkins lymphoma.

    The family was due in court Tuesday to report the results of a chest X-ray and their arrangements for an oncologist. But only Daniel's father appeared. He told Rodenberg he last saw his wife Monday evening.

    "She said she was going to leave," Hauser testified. "She said, `That's all you need to know.' And that's all I know."

    He said Colleen Hauser left her cell phone at their home in the southern Minnesota town of Sleepy Eye.

    Anthony Hauser now agrees that Daniel needs to be taken back to a doctor for re-evaluation for the best treatment, said Calvin Johnson, an attorney for the parents.
  4. by   PICNICRN
    Quote from futuremombabynurse
    It's cases like this that make families like mine not be taken seriously. Believe it or not, there are intelligent people out there that know the difference between using peppermint oil to treat a stuffy nose and CHEMOTHERAPY.

    It seems there's more to this story than just the parents refusing treatment. With or without a learning disability, a 13-year-old should be able to read. There seems to be other kinds of neglect going on in this house for the sake of their beliefs. (The fact that the founder of the system has been charged with fraud doesn't make the case any stronger). Someone needs to sit down with this kid, away from the parents, and really *truly* explain what is going on. Then let him decide. If he still refuses treatment after he understands the implications...that's his choice. But right now, I tend to side more with the judge.

    But for the record, not all people who use alternative therapies are complete :lol_hitti .
    You're right about one thing.... he needs to be taken away from his parents.... then a team could try and educate him on his disease process and treatment. But....... It is ABSOLUTELY NOT "his choice". BECAUSE HE IS A MINOR!!! The state must step in on his behalf.
  5. by   PICNICRN
    Quote from libnat
    Apparently dads okay with treatment now and mom ran off with the kid.

    Arrest ordered for mom of boy, 13, resisting chemo

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090519/...s_forced_chemo

    NEW ULM, Minn. - Authorities sought to arrest the mother of a 13-year-old boy with cancer who refuses chemotherapy after she fled with her son and missed a court hearing Tuesday on his welfare. A judge issued an arrest warrant and ordered that Daniel Hauser be placed in a foster home and be sent for an immediate examination by a pediatric oncologist so he can get treated for Hodgkins lymphoma.

    The family was due in court Tuesday to report the results of a chest X-ray and their arrangements for an oncologist. But only Daniel's father appeared. He told Rodenberg he last saw his wife Monday evening.

    "She said she was going to leave," Hauser testified. "She said, `That's all you need to know.' And that's all I know."

    He said Colleen Hauser left her cell phone at their home in the southern Minnesota town of Sleepy Eye.

    Anthony Hauser now agrees that Daniel needs to be taken back to a doctor for re-evaluation for the best treatment, said Calvin Johnson, an attorney for the parents.
    So now the plot thickens! She had better bring this kid back before she finds herself on trial for manslaughter! Sooooo sad!
  6. by   FireStarterRN
    Sounds like Mom is the extremist in the family.
  7. by   nerdtonurse?
    And when the kid dies, she'll find someone to sue, bet on it....
  8. by   Kevin RN08
    I am on record here as stating that these parents are guilty of neglect then I recalled a similar case on the Eastern Shore of Va, Abraham Cherrix, this case is different in that he completed his first round of chemo with the Hodgkin's re-emerging. But he (at 15) refused treatment and the family, with court permission (eventually), opted to try the "Hoxey treatment" and radiation. And at last I heard (or could find) he turned 18 and was considered cancer free.

    So I pose the questions, was it a poor choice of chemo regimen? Was it that his was in the 5-10% of untreatable forms of Hodgkin's? If that is the case why would this natural treatment work, or was it just the radiation?

    The differences are deeper than I can state here, but Abraham as I recall was very well spoken, obviously adequately educated both generally and about his disease. His original treatment was unsuccessful through conventional methods leading the Dr.s to increase the doseages of the chemo as the only other option.
  9. by   rn/writer
    In the current case, the boy does not appear to be understanding the issues very well. And his first round of chemo did shrink the tumor, so stopping the therapy after it had proven effective seems to make little sense. If the parents were truly opposed to conventional medicine, why did they initially go that route? And what made them put on the brakes after seeing that it worked?

    Glad Abraham had a good outcome. Hope this child can have the same.
  10. by   morte
    Quote from PICNICRN
    So now the plot thickens! She had better bring this kid back before she finds herself on trial for manslaughter! Sooooo sad!
    quite frankly i woulnt be surprised if the father is lying through his teeth......if he didnt appear to be in agreement, he could be prosecuted and the siblings put in foster care...... this way he keeps them and continues to influence them......and making a point of the fact that she left her cell phone? big deal......trak phones or underground fellow believers will facilitate communication......
  11. by   Kevin RN08
    rn/writer- I tried to point out that there are stark differences in the two cases. And I am still of the thought that parental neglect applies in this current case, but thought that in fairness that an opposing view could use some representation.
  12. by   rn/writer
    Quote from axshusz
    rn/writer- I tried to point out that there are stark differences in the two cases. And I am still of the thought that parental neglect applies in this current case, but thought that in fairness that an opposing view could use some representation.
    I'm not disagreeing with you at all. Those differences are what put the current case in the category of neglect.
  13. by   Vito Andolini
    Quote from vashtee
    I applaud the judge's decision. I don't think parents should be allowed to refuse treatment for something so treatable when the stakes are so high.

    There is always a compelling reason to give up our liberties, our Bill of Rights. Be it for this boy's life or for public safety, we are seeing and have seen and will, sadly, continue to see our rights stripped away.

    did you know that Aryan citizens of Germany could be strip-searched by Nazi soldiers on trains, in bus stations, etc.? never mind, it was only for the greater good of the Reich. There has to be a point at which you put your foot down and say, "This far and no furtherl

close