I feel that if the parents and the 13 year old child does not want the chemo then that is their decision. There was a case in 1994 with a boy 16 yrs. old that had Hodgkins disease and decided that he did not want radiation or chemo and to go through natural methods. Here is a recent article from him:
As an international search continues for an American boy who ran away to avoid chemotherapy, a local who did the same thing 15 years ago says cancer treatment should be the boy's decision to make.
Billy Best is one of the few people anywhere who knows what Daniel Hauser is going through.
Best believes the law has no business in personal healthcare decisions. The courts have said 13-year-old Hauser will die without chemotherapy to treat his cancer.
But Best says he has another story to tell, and that's how he's now trying to help the Minnesota teenager.
These days Best doesn't want to be a cancer survivor telling his story, but a freedom fighter.
"What makes you so passionate about this case?" WBZ's Beth Germano asked Best.
"It's so similar to the experience I went through when I was younger," Best said.
Hauser is now on the run with his mother, Colleen, rather than face court-ordered chemotherapy for his Hodgkins Lymphoma, the same cancer Best has recovered from.
"I'd like to grab him and hide him if I could," Best said. "I don't know where he is. I am concerned about him."
Best made national headlines in 1994 when he fled Massachusetts at age 16 to avoid radiation and chemotherapy for his cancer. When WBZ last interviewed him in 2001, his Hodgkin's Lymphoma was gone. He says he's living proof that the alternative treatments and supplements he used work.
"My doctors told me I'd be dead if I didn't use chemotherapy," Best said. "That was almost fifteen years ago."
The decision, he says, to run from a court order is excruciating.
"It's the most difficult thing, I mean you have to be desperate, in such a desperate place where you say, I'm gong to leave, leave everything I know," Best said.
And natural healing methods are what the Hausers are seeking. It's why they asked Best to come to Minnesota earlier this month to share his experience with Daniel Hauser and the court.
"(Daniel) wanted to be left alone. He was so confident in what he was doing and the supplements he was taking."
Now Best believes the law should allow the Hausers to follow their own medical path.
"They're on the run and frightened. That's no place to be when you're in a healing crisis," he said.
Best spoke with the Hausers before they fled. He says he had no idea they were going to leave.
Best also says he doesn't know if his decision to flee had any influence on them. He has not been in touch with them since they left.
Daniel Hauser and his mother were last seen Tuesday in southern California. Investigators believe they may now be in Mexico where there are dozens of clinics that use alternative therapies to treat cancer.
(© MMIX, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved.)
It is wrong for the public or courts to decide what you do with your child unless you are abusing them or want them dead. This is not the case here. If the 13 year old does not want the treatment; he is definitely old enough to decide. This is my opinion. Thanks.
Generally I'd agree that its a parent's decision but chemotherapy is live saving so if the kid does not recieve it he will die. That's a particularly fatal and rapidly progressing form of cancer as well. The natural methods suggested otherwise have no proven benefit. I'd believe any staff physician here would concur on this as well as in within cases of medical neccessity that the interest of the child legally is what should be preserved first. If they were an adult they'd have a right to make decisions as regards themselves but that's another issue.
This is such a hard call. There is a case here in WI where some parents allowed their dau to die last year of untreated diabetes because they were praying for her. The little girl died on Easter Sunday of 2008. The mother just stood trial this past week and was found guilty. The father's trial is coming up this summer I believe.
I am NOT putting down praying for illnesses. That is the first thing I do when my children are sick - but I also believe God gave us doctors and advances in medicine to SAVE lives. A person HAS to use common sense and NOT gamble with a child's life (or anyone else's).
I totally agree with you on praying. It is good to pray but definitely not the only option. I just look at this situation this way: If the child at 13 years old can be tried as an adult for a crime then I feel they are old enough to decide if they want chemo or not. The boy received chemo already and decided that he did not want to continue. Chemo unfortunately can kill people as well as if you leave the disease untreated. It is a really hard thing to understand and if the parents spoke to the child and feel that it is not right for them then I feel that they have that choice. The problem is that some parents will keep treatment from being done in order to receive some sort of compensation for their loss. THis is wrong and they definitely need to step in to take over the home and child. On the other hand, you have parents that want the best for their children without ruining their child's quality of life (which chemo does do). I am all for chemo for treatment but it is completely up to the individual or family. If we let the courts step in for every situation then we will never be able to have the freedom to choose what we or our children need or want. This is a parents reason for having children. I did not have a child to have the Government or courts tell me how to raise or care for them. I had my son to be able to raise him to be a kind, generous, thankful, caring and christian individual. I just have trouble with this situation since many other treatments have been used to cure or treat this disease and many others.
Thanks for listening to my opinion, I greatly appreciate your input it is very welcomed as well as all others. This is why we discuss these issues and why medhelp is so popular.
GOOD POINT(S)! And thank you for enlightening me. I guess I had NOT heard all of the story. Plus, *I* would NOT choose to keep on having chemo just to prolong life without quality. I would much prefer a shortened life, but have life WITH quality. It sounds like you are saying that a cure is NOT expected in this child's case.
Unfortunately, we ARE heading to a time of the government telling us HOW to raise our children. Look out. The UN is working on that AS WE SPEAK, but that's another topic (sorry Margypops).
You have the rights of the parents and then you have the rights of the child that is sick. I am the first to advocate keeping our noses out of someones business, but this is a matter of life and death. The last chest film revealed the tumour has gotten bigger, pushing on the airways and that could kill the boy before the cancer has a chance to. My nephew was cured/put in remission thanks to chemotherapy, so I guess the question is, do we intervene on behalf of the child or respect the parents right to parent. This particular cancer can be cured with chemo. In my opinion, the life of the child must come first. We can debate parental rights later. It is a really tuff situation, but we cannot sit by and allow a child to die if there is a proven treatment that can save his life. He is a minor and does not have a voice and the father is for the chemo. Someone said that the religious affliliation is Jehovah Witness. Has anyone else heard that?