Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

Forcing boy to get chemo


Recommended Posts

  • Members


This reminds me of a guest speaker I had in college that defined critical thinking as "the ability to completely disregard everything your parents taught you."

Now he wasn't saying people should be disobedient to their parents. He was saying that if you are unable to put aside your preexisting indoctrinations, you will be incapable of critical thought analysis, which I completely agree with.


I think most educated people eventually do this to some extent...some agree with their parents more than others. But yet nobody has the right to actually say "This is right indoctrination....this is wrong."

The only One who has the right to say that is GOD but unfortunately His Word doesn't count anymore in this country.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 157
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members
SouthernGal, sometimes its not an easy decision.

Right now I have the choice of putting my 4yo son on a heavy drug for his hives. The dr has left it in my lap because its such a big decision that she will not be responsible for it. I have to weigh the risk vs. the need. So far we have chosen to keep waiting (he is already on 8 pills a day for his chronic urticaria). (The dr is fine either way, says most parents do try to wait it out as long as the child is sleeping through the night and not suffering extremely).

My point is I want what is best for my child, and sometimes its not always a fast or easy decision to make. Yes if my child had cancer, I would feel my best decision was to take the chemo....on the other hand, I have a good friend who made the decision to have a bone marrow transplant in her toddler and the toddler died from the complications. (She would not have survived the cancer anyway, but yet the transplant hastened her death....actually the transplant worked, the extreme radiation hastened her death. They had no way of knowing what would happen..they had to make the choice blindly, like many things in life.)

We have no right to sit here and tell someone else what is best for their child or their family, whether we agree or not.


What if someone believes it is ok for their child to look at pornography, or to not brush their teeth, or to go around infested with lice, or to have dangerous animals around their children . . . Parents don't know what's best in most cases and need to be told what to do. This is why we have laws, doctors and lawyers. I don't know who came up with the thought that just because they fathered or birthed a person, they know what is best for that person.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members


What if someone believes it is ok for their child to look at pornography, or to not brush their teeth, or to go around infested with lice, or to have dangerous animals around their children . . . Parents don't know what's best in most cases and need to be told what to do. This is why we have laws, doctors and lawyers. I don't know who came up with the thought that just because they fathered or birthed a person, they know what is best for that person.


I'm not saying every person does.

The Bible is the first authority. That would solve most of the problems above. All laws should be based on the Bible, because God is the ultimate authority on right and wrong.

And to say "parents don't know what's best in MOST CASES" is quite offensive to me as a mom of four kids. Do you have kids?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

What if someone believes it is ok for their child to look at pornography, or to not brush their teeth, or to go around infested with lice, or to have dangerous animals around their children . . . Parents don't know what's best in most cases and need to be told what to do. This is why we have laws, doctors and lawyers. I don't know who came up with the thought that just because they fathered or birthed a person, they know what is best for that person.


Excuse me??? A better statement would be, "Parents don't know what's best in some cases and need to be told what to do."

Most people have something called "common sense". It is knowledge that is common to most people. Common sense tells parents that it is not ok for their child to look at pornography, it is not ok to not brush teeth, it is not ok to go around infested with lice, it is not ok to have dangerous animals around their children.

Some parents do need help but not most. I/we, do not need more laws from people who do not know me/us or my/our life situation but feel they know what is best. God gave my children to my husband and me, not the state.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Check this out: http://www.angelfire.com/az/sthurston/a ... errix.html

Abraham Cherrix was where this young man is in 2006. He was 15 and didn't want to do a second round of chemo. As of a year ago, his blood showed no Hodgkins. And he pursued alternative meds...sounds to me like it worked for him......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members


Excuse me??? A better statement would be, "Parents don't know what's best in some cases and need to be told what to do."

Most people have something called "common sense". It is knowledge that is common to most people. Common sense tells parents that it is not ok for their child to look at pornography, it is not ok to not brush teeth, it is not ok to go around infested with lice, it is not ok to have dangerous animals around their children.

Some parents do need help but not most. I/we, do not need more laws from people who do not know me/us or my/our life situation but feel they know what is best. God gave my children to my husband and me, not the state.


....and btw, I don't know where they came up with the thought that because someone has a degree in law and has a position in government it suddenly makes them a professional doctor/psychologist/child rear-er. :uuhm:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Yes, they think we are all ignorant. I am having a hard time with my little 1yr. old. I wrote in another thread about her having a UTI last month. Well, I had to take her in for these two tests to "make sure" that there wasn't anything "wrong" with her that caused the infection. After they put her through a super traumatic experience (so much so, that my pediatrician's office told me to contact the hospital and tell them about it--which I did so, as politely as possible) the doctor had his nurse call and tell me they scheduled Liddy an appt. to see a "specialist" over a condition the radiologist told me was "slight", that she would "grow out of" and it was "not a big deal". Apparently, they want to have the specialist give their opinion of whether or not she should be on antibiotics prophylactically until she "outgrows" it (which could be a year or two). So......if I refuse to put my baby on antibiotics for a couple of years, do I, like the OP article parents, have to worry about DSS coming in and trying to take my baby away? That is ridiculous, and yet it is the same thing, isn't it? Now, my reasons for not wanting my baby on extended antibiotics, are not "religious", and I am prepared to show her doctor scientific data from the official Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics that demonstrate its negative consequences, but I am also preparing myself for him to throw a fit about it. It should not be like that! I am not unreasonable, I am going to suggest that if he want to culture for UTI every so often out of "precaution", so be it, but I think the method that we choose to manage my daughter's medical needs ought to be her father's and my decision, not a mandate of a 3rd party.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
SouthernGal, sometimes its not an easy decision.

My point is I want what is best for my child, and sometimes its not always a fast or easy decision to make. Yes if my child had cancer, I would feel my best decision was to take the chemo....on the other hand, I have a good friend who made the decision to have a bone marrow transplant in her toddler and the toddler died from the complications. (She would not have survived the cancer anyway, but yet the transplant hastened her death....actually the transplant worked, the extreme radiation hastened her death. They had no way of knowing what would happen..they had to make the choice blindly, like many things in life.)

We have no right to sit here and tell someone else what is best for their child or their family, whether we agree or not.


I could not agree with you more in that we don't have the right to tell someone else what's best for their child or family member. (I don't think the government should step in & tell us what to do, HOWEVER, there are cases where neglect is involved & I'm not sure how to most effectively deal with that).

Situations do get really complex sometimes and we can only make what we consider to be the best decision after researching all the facts which I understand was the case in your friend's situation. We don't know what the future holds for anyone (only God knows that). We have taken care of an elderly parent, there were tough choices to make......we simply wanted what was best (although sometimes there were no good options).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
Neglect is just that...neglect. In the OP case' date=' it was decision making that others disagreed with. Not "neglect".[/quote']
Yep! One round of chemo, and then a decision to go natural. Doesn't sound like neglect to me. Sounds like government interference!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members


....and btw, I don't know where they came up with the thought that because someone has a degree in law and has a position in government it suddenly makes them a professional doctor/psychologist/child rear-er. :uuhm:


I don't work for the government (my firm represents foreign governments). I also never claimed to be a professional doctor/psychologiest/childrearer. However, I do believe that I have enough awareness that I can say that the vast majority of people don't have common sense. People will eat red meat three times a weak all the while knowing that it causes heart disease. They will buy their kids the cereal with the cartoon character on the front which leads to a sugar addiction which in turn leads to a long life of poor health. I have studied the law and I know the reason why we have law and it is because people cannot be trusted to their own devices. We have to have laws that punish child abuse/neglect because it is a fact of life. The reason you elect congressmen is so you have someone to tell you what you need/should be doing because you yourself cannot be trusted to do those things.

I haven't given a scintilla of evidence which suggest the proper way to rear a child. I have merely stated that if a child's best interest are at objective odds with the parents beliefs/choices/wishes, then the state needs to be the one making decisions which affect the child. In my opinion, which is based on my personal experience, most people need help in this category.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Most people eh. I feel sorry for you, then, to have had such a miserable experience with humanity.

The government is there to protect the general safety of the country, not to micromanage the citizens.

I'm truly sorry you feel that I, along with other moms here, do not know what is in the best interest of their children.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...