| cathyb 2006-08-02, 2:26 am |
|
awthrawthr@yahoo.com wrote:
> cathyb wrote:
>
> The child won't be growing up to reflect on anything if he were to take
> a second bite of the poison apple.
>
>
> Ah, but you want to make the comparison between child abuse and a
> medical choice. Of course you're assuming that the Hoxey method is the
> 'abuse.'
Yes; since there isn't a skerrick of evidence that it works, I would
say so.
> Meanwhile, the parents, the child and many others consider the
> poison chemo to be the abuse...in other words your comparison doesn't
> work because whereas true child abuse is clearcut...as when a child is
> beaten with kitchen utensils, beltbuckles, etc... the choice of medical
> care is something entirely different.
Actually, I said abuse or negligence. And indeed the state can, should
and does intervene when parents are stupid or negligent concerning the
health of their child, or any other dependent.
>
>
> There is no evidence that the parents are not acting in the child's
> best interest. NONE. All we have here is your disgreement about what is
> best. The parents disagree with your opinion. They have that right.
You're missing the point. There are plenty of instances of parents
disagreeing with the state as to the best interest of their child.
There are plenty of parents who think that child abuse is loving
discipline. They have the right to disagree with me (and the state) on
that issue, surely, but they do not have the right to inflict their
views on their child, and the state will intervene. As it would if, for
instance, a parent neglected to have their child educated to a certain
level, no matter the views of that parent on education.
Children are not possessions, and they have a right to expect that if
their parents are making decisions that are clearly not in their best
interests, the state will protect them.
|