What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Do You Have The Right ?

Jason wrote
cancer is never cured its merely put into remission
Click to expand...
Not true Jason my brother' caught early enough many types of cancer can be cured. but the thing is' it must be caught early and also the type that it is.
 
i have had coworker, retire early and never said why , die six months later. he knew he had cancer and told only his wife and his closest friends and went home to piddle as long as he could and died. he lost money as he took his checks ten years early but he didn't care. he wasn't going to need that money.
 
Lewis W said:
Not true Jason my brother' caught early enough many types of cancer can be cured. but the thing is' it must be caught early and also the type that it is.
Click to expand...


we had a member here who at the age of 35 had chemo and you may known him , goju brian. he said that it was in remission and never cured. it was likely a 90% chance that it wouldn't come back it still could come back.
 
jasoncran said:
gee if I had that option. of being healthy then death, or taking a risk and its only 40% chance that It will work. I would loose my hair, I cant work, I cant do my hobby, and I wont be able to see the earth one last time possible and do what I like to do. I think I would refuse treatment and say good bye to my loved ones and die in pain from last moments.

Its not like my friend at the age 79 didn't see this coming. she also had a ton issues that I didn't mention, a stroke in the middle of it and also it took a while to recover from chemo. I think I would like my wife and kids to remember me as healthy then just passing rather then bald, puking and skinny as a rail and bedridden then dying.
Click to expand...

There is a big difference between an old person who had a long life and dies at 79 vs a 10 year old who hasn't gotten a chance at life. You assume the worst, but as I point out kids have a far higher chance of living. You would deny a kid a 40% chance to live? Assuming the worse of all possible cases it is still 40%
 
kevinmaynard said:
There is a big difference between an old person who had a long life and dies at 79 vs a 10 year old who hasn't gotten a chance at life. You assume the worst, but as I point out kids have a far higher chance of living. You would deny a kid a 40% chance to live? Assuming the worse of all possible cases it is still 40%
Click to expand...
yes i would if they said i want to die. i have made my decision and i want you to remember me as child not as sick.
 
that not an assumption that's the rate for survival for the patients with aml! ten treated six die. Holland has killed kids who had chronic illness and wanted to live. im putting their health in their hands. they have to want to get better. what if he doesn't want to eat. he wants to die. you do realsie that the mind can do that. we can with it choose to die and do that given enough of a bad health and that level of desire. it can also bounce us back to good health.
 
jasoncran said:
yes i would if they said i want to die. i have made my decision and i want you to remember me as child not as sick.
Click to expand...

Children aren't old enough to make such decisions. Not at ten. If a ten year old can decide to die than government could say they are old enough to decide to get married or have sex. That is just weird.
 
Yeah Jason I remember Brian. I have seen the affects of chemo on a few people and I know what it can do. but the subject here is' are the parents wrong for denying this girl treatment. Many children go through this treatment all over the country and especially at St Jude's or here near me at Fox Chase or CHOP here in Philly. I remember in 1965 a girl little girl had cancer in the room next to me in the hospital and they were giving her chemo. well guess what the girl died anyway. But they were not that good at it in 1965.
 
kevinmaynard said:
Children aren't old enough to make such decisions. Not at ten. If a ten year old can decide to die than government could say they are old enough to decide to get married or have sex. That is just weird.
Click to expand...
in some states they allow a teen to go to ppl and abort a child and yet not tell their parents that they did that. florida isn't such a state but i know that not all states have that parentals consent laws.

how would tell a kid who knows statistics that its worth immense pain and suffering to live with a 40% chance of life when he knows and doesn't want to endure that pain?
 
Lewis W said:
Yeah Jason I remember Brian. I have seen the affects of chemo on a few people and I know what it can do. but the subject here is' are the parents wrong for denying this girl treatment. Many children go through this treatment all over the country and especially at St Jude's or here near me at Fox Chase or CHOP here in Philly. I remember in 1965 a girl little girl had cancer in the room next to me in the hospital and they were giving her chemo. well guess what the girl died anyway. But they were not that good at it in 1965.
Click to expand...
it has improved yes but again what type of leukemia does she have? she cant really take a lot of it. first off both kidney are stressed now. and also her other organs. the chemo may just kill her anyway. remember chemo is hard on the organs already. this child has cancer all over. its likely she will die.they waited too long
the article says that she it mestazised in all organs. that's not good.the links i have read all have said with leukemia it depends on how late it is as well.
 
jasoncran said:
in some states they allow a teen to go to ppl and abort a child and yet not tell their parents that they did that. florida isn't such a state but i know that not all states have that parentals consent laws.

how would tell a kid who knows statistics that its worth immense pain and suffering to live with a 40% chance of life when he knows and doesn't want to endure that pain?
Click to expand...

Same way you tell them to eat their vegetables.
 
jasoncran said:
it has improved yes but again what type of chemo does she have? she cant really take a lot of it. first off both kidney are stressed now. and also her other organs. the chemo may just kill her anyway. remember chemo is hard on the organs already. this child has cancer all over. its likely she will die.they waited too long.
Click to expand...

Yes her parents have likely given her a death sentence. Very sad.
 
so you would strap that kid to the chair and hold him while they radiate him or her? funny thing is that we have this conversation and yet if was born now and i had the bi inclination and wanted to stop that and my parents wanted to help me. the state of California would stop them from doing what i as a kid want to do. be a hetero male.
 
jasoncran said:
so you would strap that kid to the chair and hold him while they radiate him or her? funny thing is that we have this conversation and yet if was born now and i had the bi inclination and wanted to stop that and my parents wanted to help me. the state of California would stop them from doing what i as a kid want to do. be a hetero male.
Click to expand...

I think you are exaggerating the worse of all possible cases. Chemo is drugs. Perhaps some radiation. Kids get held down when they get vaccinated sometimes.

As California stopping your parents from sending you to psychological reprogramming that is a rather bizarre analogy, but if you asked for it and your parents agreed California wouldn't stop you.
 
It's a death sentence if she doesn't get that therapy, and the doctors know it. They do not have a moral right to refuse life saving medical treatment for her. I'm sorry but it doesn't work that way. The child's odds of survival are low as it is, and all they're doing is sealing the fate.
 
actually its illegal for a child to go into that therapy in California. my brother hated shots and my sister they ran but weren't strapped in. my parents stopped them but they weren't put into a restraint chair that takes a judge to order that. in both prisons and juvie they can be forced to take meds but it has to be determined that they aren't do so and then after being there they are under state care then forced to take meds. I have never heard of a hospital doing that to a kid without court order.
 
jasoncran said:
actually its illegal for a child to go into that therapy in California. my brother hated shots and my sister they ran but weren't strapped in. my parents stopped them but they weren't put into a restraint chair that takes a judge to order that. in both prisons and juvie they can be forced to take meds but it has to be determined that they aren't do so and then after being there they are under state care then forced to take meds. I have never heard of a hospital doing that to a kid without court order.
Click to expand...

I don't follow you. Yeah a therapy that isn't available in the state isn't available in the state. If you want it go to another state California can't stop you. Can't get a good skin graft in Wyoming go to Washington state. As for strapping kids into a chair. That is your imagined way the kid will get chemo, and in no way is how it would really happen.
 
kindly put me on ignore. you said that. if they said no, and that is going to take some doing to get a child who refuses treatment. they would have to be baker acted first and then determined if whacko. that is the only way.my brother and sister were baker acted.once that is done they can then force treatment. my brother didn't want to go to cebh nor my sister. they were forced against their wills.
 
chemo is not an easy thing. it may well be better then no chemo... There are parts of the last 5 years i still get confused... time lost, body changes , at my age those changes are less important. I dont know if i would do chemo again then i am 67 so not a child.
 
kevinmaynard said:
It can be that low for adults but not for children. The success rate for children is 90%
http://www.seattlechildrens.org/medical-conditions/cancers-tumors/leukemia-treatment/
Click to expand...

They based that 90% figure on- "The cure rate – defined as surviving for at least five years"
This isn't about which treatment is better, it's about who is making that decision. They are not unfit parents because they choose an alternative therapy. Voodoo is just a distraction, it hasn't proven to cure leukemia, their alternative treatment has. I think the state is overstepping by taking away their rights.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top