| Mark Probert 2006-08-02, 4:30 pm |
| awthrawthr@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> Their parents decide what medical risks their children will take.
In our system of laws, only when that decision is in the best interest
of the child. Thus, a parent does not have the right to have their child
forgo a blood transfusion when that transfusion is necessary to save
their life.
>
> The bigger "egad" is a State usurping the parents. While you would
> obviously prefer that your child be subjected to chemo if, God forbid,
> s/he had cancer, you surely wouldn't be happy if outsiders took custody
> away from you to inflict their own decision in your place.
Unhappiness is not germane to the issue. It is a question of what
benefits the child. In this case, there is no evidence that the Hoaxsey
treatment does anything, while chemo does give the child a better chance
of survival.
|