Court Denies Teen’s Wish to Refuse Cancer Treatment

[Michelle420]

"Cassandra C" reportedly believes chemotherapy will do her harm rather than save her life.

A 17-year-old cancer patient does not have the right to refuse treatment for her disease, the state of Connecticut’s highest court has ruled.

Cassandra was removed from Fortin’s care after the mother and daughter missed follow-up appointments and placed into the custody of child welfare officials, who forced her to undergo the cancer treatment. The teenager ran away from hospital after just two days of chemotherapy.

The court made its expedited decision Thursday following a 45-minute hearing, during which lawyers for Cassandra and her mother argued that even though Cassandra is a minor, she can make her own health decisions. Cassandra is months away from turning 18.

Connecticut Rules Cancer-Stricken Teen Must Undergo Chemotherapy

In one instance she is allowed to do what she wants with her body ( as in abortion) but in another instance she is not allowed to seek a medical alternative if she wants to.

This is very similar to an instance that happened a few years ago, except it was a boy. It is a cancer called Hodgkin's lymphoma which has a VERY successful cure rate with the chemotherapy. Why she would refuse the chemo, I do not know, especially considering the odds of it being CURATIVE. She seems like a very silly little girl, IMO.

I would take the chemo , but if an adult chose not to then that's their choice.

Pretty much Disir already answered what I wanted to know so I am done with the discussion.

 

[R.D.]

It made no sense to me the idea of Her Body Her choice but then not allow her choices in other instances.

Now that Disir has explained it's not really about her body her choice, I get it.

It's about controlling peoples choices so they don't harm themselves.

Disir keeps bringing up the point that there is an 85% success rate in the chemo treatment.

This is brought up because if there was no success rate then the question would be her right to die or perhaps even assisted suicide.

Still, I am disappointed in that whole Jargon: Her Body Her Choice because as it turns out , it's not really true.

Instead is just about doing what others in power and authority decide you must do with your own body.

Pretty deceptive.

So they don't harm themselves? Abortion, promiscuity, gender benders,don't harm people? Alternative options, faith, peace of mind do? Taking her from her family isn't harmful?

This has nothing to do with harm, it's control. Period. Take the off chance she just wished to die as nature intended...there is not self harm in that.

 

[Michelle420]

It made no sense to me the idea of Her Body Her choice but then not allow her choices in other instances.

Now that Disir has explained it's not really about her body her choice, I get it.

It's about controlling peoples choices so they don't harm themselves.

Disir keeps bringing up the point that there is an 85% success rate in the chemo treatment.

This is brought up because if there was no success rate then the question would be her right to die or perhaps even assisted suicide.

Still, I am disappointed in that whole Jargon: Her Body Her Choice because as it turns out , it's not really true.

Instead is just about doing what others in power and authority decide you must do with your own body.

Pretty deceptive.

So they don't harm themselves? Abortion, promiscuity, gender benders,don't harm people? Alternative options, faith, peace of mind do? Taking her from her family isn't harmful?

This has nothing to do with harm, it's control. Period. Take the off chance she just wished to die as nature intended...there is not self harm in that.

I agree with you, it's about control issues.

But before Disir's last few posts I honestly didn't understand why it was considered ok in one instance and not the other.

I finally get the rationale behind it which is what I was wanting to get from this discussion I wanted to comprehend the idea behind something that seemed so hypocritical to me.

 

[Disir]

I disagree.

That's fine with me.

But your reasoning you gave is irrelevant to me.

Because if she was 18 and refused nobody would say anything, so saying it has a high success rate doesn't really factor into the right to make your own decision for your body.

If she was 18 or even if the state of Connecticut considered her to have reached the age of majority at 17 then it wouldn't be an issue.

The black market in Texas:
The Rise of the DIY Abortion in Texas - The Atlantic

Self induced abortion case:
The Back Alley Revisited Sepsis after Attempted Self-Induced Abortion

13 year old self induced abortion.
Girl performs at-home abortion Polk Township man 30 charged with rape concealing death of child - News - poconorecord.com - Stroudsburg PA

Your argument is not relevant.

Sorry but it is for me and you have not answered me why it is HER body HER choice in abortion but not in choosing her own medical care.

They are medical procedures why is she allowed to choose for herself under the right to choose because its her body but it's not ok in the next instance?

Abortion Rights

• A teen in Connecticut does not have to get her parents’ permission to get an abortion.
• There is no mandatory waiting period in your state before a teen can get an abortion.
• Your state provides Medicaid coverage for medically necessary abortions. . If you need help paying for an abortion, call the National Abortion Federation Hotline at 1-800-772-9100, Monday–Friday, 7 a.m. to 11 p.m.; Saturday–Sunday, 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. (Eastern Daylight Time). The hotline can tell you where and how to get financial help for an abortion in the U.S.
• To learn about the process of adoption and the services available, visit the National Council for Adoption and the Independent Adoption Center. You can also call the National Adoption Information Clearinghouse at 1-888-251-0075 for more information.

Connecticut - Sex Etc.

Right to Refuse Medical Treatment
The Supreme Court has held that adults have the right to personal autonomy in matters relating to their own medical care. Adults, as long as they are competent to understand their decision, have the right to refuse medical treatment, even life-saving medical treatment, though a state may require clear and convincing evidence that a person wanted treatment ended before it allows termination. A state may restrict family members from terminating treatment for another, because this right belongs to each individual. The court has not extended this right to allow physician-assisted suicide.

Constitutional Law Privacy Rights and Personal Autonomy Justia

So in one instance she has a right ot terminate a pregnancy and have a medical procedure. But in the other instance when she personally does not want chemo , the hospital calls social services and has her remvoed from her home away from her mother and forces her to get chemo anyway.

What I am trying to understand here is why is not Her Body Her Choice in this instance.

Because she is a minor and mom didn't follow through. Her chance for survival is 80-85 percent with Chemo. Not with alternative medicine.

Not requiring parental consent helps make sure that a minor doesn't attempt a self induced abortion. You did see that 40% of unsafe abortions occur starting at age 15. Yes?

The chance of survival again is irrelevant of what I am asking, she doesn't want the treatment.

Ok so the reasoning of allowing her to chose a medical procedure is so she doesn't harm herself not because it's her body her choice, correct?

The chance of survival is relevant as she is a minor.
The reasoning behind allowing teens to acquire abortions without parental consent is about safety. It is exactly what I said.

 

[Michelle420]

That's fine with me.

But your reasoning you gave is irrelevant to me.

Because if she was 18 and refused nobody would say anything, so saying it has a high success rate doesn't really factor into the right to make your own decision for your body.

If she was 18 or even if the state of Connecticut considered her to have reached the age of majority at 17 then it wouldn't be an issue.

The black market in Texas:
The Rise of the DIY Abortion in Texas - The Atlantic

Self induced abortion case:
The Back Alley Revisited Sepsis after Attempted Self-Induced Abortion

13 year old self induced abortion.
Girl performs at-home abortion Polk Township man 30 charged with rape concealing death of child - News - poconorecord.com - Stroudsburg PA

Your argument is not relevant.

Sorry but it is for me and you have not answered me why it is HER body HER choice in abortion but not in choosing her own medical care.

They are medical procedures why is she allowed to choose for herself under the right to choose because its her body but it's not ok in the next instance?

Abortion Rights

• A teen in Connecticut does not have to get her parents’ permission to get an abortion.
• There is no mandatory waiting period in your state before a teen can get an abortion.
• Your state provides Medicaid coverage for medically necessary abortions. . If you need help paying for an abortion, call the National Abortion Federation Hotline at 1-800-772-9100, Monday–Friday, 7 a.m. to 11 p.m.; Saturday–Sunday, 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. (Eastern Daylight Time). The hotline can tell you where and how to get financial help for an abortion in the U.S.
• To learn about the process of adoption and the services available, visit the National Council for Adoption and the Independent Adoption Center. You can also call the National Adoption Information Clearinghouse at 1-888-251-0075 for more information.

Connecticut - Sex Etc.

Right to Refuse Medical Treatment
The Supreme Court has held that adults have the right to personal autonomy in matters relating to their own medical care. Adults, as long as they are competent to understand their decision, have the right to refuse medical treatment, even life-saving medical treatment, though a state may require clear and convincing evidence that a person wanted treatment ended before it allows termination. A state may restrict family members from terminating treatment for another, because this right belongs to each individual. The court has not extended this right to allow physician-assisted suicide.

Constitutional Law Privacy Rights and Personal Autonomy Justia

So in one instance she has a right ot terminate a pregnancy and have a medical procedure. But in the other instance when she personally does not want chemo , the hospital calls social services and has her remvoed from her home away from her mother and forces her to get chemo anyway.

What I am trying to understand here is why is not Her Body Her Choice in this instance.

Because she is a minor and mom didn't follow through. Her chance for survival is 80-85 percent with Chemo. Not with alternative medicine.

Not requiring parental consent helps make sure that a minor doesn't attempt a self induced abortion. You did see that 40% of unsafe abortions occur starting at age 15. Yes?

The chance of survival again is irrelevant of what I am asking, she doesn't want the treatment.

Ok so the reasoning of allowing her to chose a medical procedure is so she doesn't harm herself not because it's her body her choice, correct?

The chance of survival is relevant as she is a minor.
The reasoning behind allowing teens to acquire abortions without parental consent is about safety. It is exactly what I said.

To be honest it's irrelevant to me for what I was seeking out of the discussion because in 3 months when she is 18 she can stop treatment by her choice.

If you find it relevant for your discussion that's ok, but someone else will have to want to discuss it further with you then.

Thanks for clarifying for me what I was trying to understand about the Her Body Her Choice differences.

 

[Michelle420]

That's fine with me.

But your reasoning you gave is irrelevant to me.

Because if she was 18 and refused nobody would say anything, so saying it has a high success rate doesn't really factor into the right to make your own decision for your body.

If she was 18 or even if the state of Connecticut considered her to have reached the age of majority at 17 then it wouldn't be an issue.

The black market in Texas:
The Rise of the DIY Abortion in Texas - The Atlantic

Self induced abortion case:
The Back Alley Revisited Sepsis after Attempted Self-Induced Abortion

13 year old self induced abortion.
Girl performs at-home abortion Polk Township man 30 charged with rape concealing death of child - News - poconorecord.com - Stroudsburg PA

Your argument is not relevant.

Sorry but it is for me and you have not answered me why it is HER body HER choice in abortion but not in choosing her own medical care.

They are medical procedures why is she allowed to choose for herself under the right to choose because its her body but it's not ok in the next instance?

Abortion Rights

• A teen in Connecticut does not have to get her parents’ permission to get an abortion.
• There is no mandatory waiting period in your state before a teen can get an abortion.
• Your state provides Medicaid coverage for medically necessary abortions. . If you need help paying for an abortion, call the National Abortion Federation Hotline at 1-800-772-9100, Monday–Friday, 7 a.m. to 11 p.m.; Saturday–Sunday, 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. (Eastern Daylight Time). The hotline can tell you where and how to get financial help for an abortion in the U.S.
• To learn about the process of adoption and the services available, visit the National Council for Adoption and the Independent Adoption Center. You can also call the National Adoption Information Clearinghouse at 1-888-251-0075 for more information.

Connecticut - Sex Etc.

Right to Refuse Medical Treatment
The Supreme Court has held that adults have the right to personal autonomy in matters relating to their own medical care. Adults, as long as they are competent to understand their decision, have the right to refuse medical treatment, even life-saving medical treatment, though a state may require clear and convincing evidence that a person wanted treatment ended before it allows termination. A state may restrict family members from terminating treatment for another, because this right belongs to each individual. The court has not extended this right to allow physician-assisted suicide.

Constitutional Law Privacy Rights and Personal Autonomy Justia

So in one instance she has a right ot terminate a pregnancy and have a medical procedure. But in the other instance when she personally does not want chemo , the hospital calls social services and has her remvoed from her home away from her mother and forces her to get chemo anyway.

What I am trying to understand here is why is not Her Body Her Choice in this instance.

Because she is a minor and mom didn't follow through. Her chance for survival is 80-85 percent with Chemo. Not with alternative medicine.

Not requiring parental consent helps make sure that a minor doesn't attempt a self induced abortion. You did see that 40% of unsafe abortions occur starting at age 15. Yes?

The chance of survival again is irrelevant of what I am asking, she doesn't want the treatment.

Ok so the reasoning of allowing her to chose a medical procedure is so she doesn't harm herself not because it's her body her choice, correct?

The chance of survival is relevant as she is a minor.
The reasoning behind allowing teens to acquire abortions without parental consent is about safety. It is exactly what I said.

And I acknowledged you and thanked you twice, hit the thank you button and said thank you.

I don't have to agree or disagree about it,I simply wanted to understand the reasoning.

I got what I needed.

 

[Disir]

I didn't see that until after I kicked in the post. I started it, left, came back and finished it.

 

[Michelle420]

I didn't see that until after I kicked in the post. I started it, left, came back and finished it.

No worries, thanks again

 

[Disir]

Just as a heads up. She turns 18 in September.

 

[Michelle420]

Just as a heads up. She turns 18 in September.

Meh, she will quit treatment then, still irrelevant to me, if she doesn't want treatment I don't think she should be forced to.

Anyway, I'm moving on.

Enjoy.

 

[ChrisL]

If she was 18 or even if the state of Connecticut considered her to have reached the age of majority at 17 then it wouldn't be an issue.

The black market in Texas:
The Rise of the DIY Abortion in Texas - The Atlantic

Self induced abortion case:
The Back Alley Revisited Sepsis after Attempted Self-Induced Abortion

13 year old self induced abortion.
Girl performs at-home abortion Polk Township man 30 charged with rape concealing death of child - News - poconorecord.com - Stroudsburg PA

Your argument is not relevant.

Sorry but it is for me and you have not answered me why it is HER body HER choice in abortion but not in choosing her own medical care.

They are medical procedures why is she allowed to choose for herself under the right to choose because its her body but it's not ok in the next instance?

Abortion Rights

• A teen in Connecticut does not have to get her parents’ permission to get an abortion.
• There is no mandatory waiting period in your state before a teen can get an abortion.
• Your state provides Medicaid coverage for medically necessary abortions. . If you need help paying for an abortion, call the National Abortion Federation Hotline at 1-800-772-9100, Monday–Friday, 7 a.m. to 11 p.m.; Saturday–Sunday, 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. (Eastern Daylight Time). The hotline can tell you where and how to get financial help for an abortion in the U.S.
• To learn about the process of adoption and the services available, visit the National Council for Adoption and the Independent Adoption Center. You can also call the National Adoption Information Clearinghouse at 1-888-251-0075 for more information.

Connecticut - Sex Etc.

Right to Refuse Medical Treatment
The Supreme Court has held that adults have the right to personal autonomy in matters relating to their own medical care. Adults, as long as they are competent to understand their decision, have the right to refuse medical treatment, even life-saving medical treatment, though a state may require clear and convincing evidence that a person wanted treatment ended before it allows termination. A state may restrict family members from terminating treatment for another, because this right belongs to each individual. The court has not extended this right to allow physician-assisted suicide.

Constitutional Law Privacy Rights and Personal Autonomy Justia

So in one instance she has a right ot terminate a pregnancy and have a medical procedure. But in the other instance when she personally does not want chemo , the hospital calls social services and has her remvoed from her home away from her mother and forces her to get chemo anyway.

What I am trying to understand here is why is not Her Body Her Choice in this instance.

Because she is a minor and mom didn't follow through. Her chance for survival is 80-85 percent with Chemo. Not with alternative medicine.

Not requiring parental consent helps make sure that a minor doesn't attempt a self induced abortion. You did see that 40% of unsafe abortions occur starting at age 15. Yes?

The chance of survival again is irrelevant of what I am asking, she doesn't want the treatment.

Ok so the reasoning of allowing her to chose a medical procedure is so she doesn't harm herself not because it's her body her choice, correct?

The chance of survival is relevant as she is a minor.
The reasoning behind allowing teens to acquire abortions without parental consent is about safety. It is exactly what I said.

To be honest it's irrelevant to me for what I was seeking out of the discussion because in 3 months when she is 18 she can stop treatment by her choice.

If you find it relevant for your discussion that's ok, but someone else will have to want to discuss it further with you then.

Thanks for clarifying for me what I was trying to understand about the Her Body Her Choice differences.

True, but I can't see wanting to die at 17 or 18 years old when you have a completely curable condition. Sure, the treatment might be uncomfortable to say the least, but it would save her life! I have to wonder what kind of a person would do that, and at that age without suffering from any other conditions that might be terminal? What about her parents and how will they feel? Does their opinion mean nothing at all? This is their child that they have dedicated their lives to. I have to wonder if she isn't suffering from depression and needs treatment or some other mental illness.

Also, although this might sound a bit un-PC, sometimes sick children are spoiled by their parents. Sometimes, they will even use their illness as a weapon against their parents. I've seen it happen with a girl I knew. She would emotionally blackmail her parents with her illness. She even WAS terminal. A very sad situation, but she had been VERY spoiled by her parents because of that.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

"Cassandra C" reportedly believes chemotherapy will do her harm rather than save her life.

A 17-year-old cancer patient does not have the right to refuse treatment for her disease, the state of Connecticut’s highest court has ruled.

Cassandra was removed from Fortin’s care after the mother and daughter missed follow-up appointments and placed into the custody of child welfare officials, who forced her to undergo the cancer treatment. The teenager ran away from hospital after just two days of chemotherapy.

The court made its expedited decision Thursday following a 45-minute hearing, during which lawyers for Cassandra and her mother argued that even though Cassandra is a minor, she can make her own health decisions. Cassandra is months away from turning 18.

Connecticut Rules Cancer-Stricken Teen Must Undergo Chemotherapy

In one instance she is allowed to do what she wants with her body ( as in abortion) but in another instance she is not allowed to seek a medical alternative if she wants to.

question:
Can Connecticut Force A Teenage Girl To Undergo Chemotherapy?
Can Connecticut Force A Teenage Girl To Undergo Chemotherapy Shots - Health News NPR ..
..

Because the court gave the state Department of Children and Families temporary custody of Cassandra earlier, it os not the girl's choice to make -- by law.

"Cassandra's doctors say that without treatment, she will die. They testified in previous hearings that Hodgkin lymphoma, a cancer of the lymph system, is lethal without the recommended treatment. With treatment, she has an 85 percent chance of survival."

drifter
Don't you think the state would be remiss and even evil to deny it's responsibility here? Or are you advocating lowering the age for adulthood/legal consent and responsibility?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Strange world when the left promotes doctor assisted suicide but forces a young woman to endure a painful procedure that isn't guaranteed to prolong her life.

The left? The state was granted custody. They have a responsibility.

Do you have a quarrel with this: "Cassandra's doctors say that without treatment, she will die. They testified in previous hearings that Hodgkin lymphoma, a cancer of the lymph system, is lethal without the recommended treatment. With treatment, she has an 85 percent chance of survival." -- or are you using somebody with cancer as a weapon in your pitiful war on the imagined left?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

If she was fighting to commit suicide, the lefties would be howling to let her, that's what's so ironic.

It's the state that has custody, not 'the left'

get yer facts straight

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

If she were an adult, I would agree with her.

Needless to say, its really stupid to compare it to abortion. Instead of the usual derailing of a worthwhile discussion, start your own thread.

brilliantly clear

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

If she was fighting to commit suicide, the lefties would be howling to let her, that's what's so ironic.

If she wanted an abortion the courts would say her body her choice.

But if she wants to try alternative medicine it's not her body or choice?

It's a life and death situation. no? She's a minor, yes? The state has custody. this isn't about her.

When she turns older she can choose the stupid alternative that has very little chance to help her type of cancer

this case is about the state's responsibilities to minors in their custody. If she wanted an abortion the state could not stop her. jesus, don't get trapped into koshernut and whitewash diatribes

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

If she were an adult, I would agree with her.

Needless to say, its really stupid to compare it to abortion. Instead of the usual derailing of a worthwhile discussion, start your own thread.

Nope if she has that right based on it being her body her choice, she should have the right to choose her medical care.

I did start this thread.

The state has custody. Under the law she COULD get an abortion without their permission. This is not about her. Justice is blind

 

[bodecea]

"Cassandra C" reportedly believes chemotherapy will do her harm rather than save her life.

A 17-year-old cancer patient does not have the right to refuse treatment for her disease, the state of Connecticut’s highest court has ruled.

Cassandra was removed from Fortin’s care after the mother and daughter missed follow-up appointments and placed into the custody of child welfare officials, who forced her to undergo the cancer treatment. The teenager ran away from hospital after just two days of chemotherapy.

The court made its expedited decision Thursday following a 45-minute hearing, during which lawyers for Cassandra and her mother argued that even though Cassandra is a minor, she can make her own health decisions. Cassandra is months away from turning 18.

Connecticut Rules Cancer-Stricken Teen Must Undergo Chemotherapy

In one instance she is allowed to do what she wants with her body ( as in abortion) but in another instance she is not allowed to seek a medical alternative if she wants to.

Not understanding her not wanting chemo...but on the other hand, not understanding the state forcing her by law to do chemo.

 

[Michelle420]

"Cassandra C" reportedly believes chemotherapy will do her harm rather than save her life.

A 17-year-old cancer patient does not have the right to refuse treatment for her disease, the state of Connecticut’s highest court has ruled.

Cassandra was removed from Fortin’s care after the mother and daughter missed follow-up appointments and placed into the custody of child welfare officials, who forced her to undergo the cancer treatment. The teenager ran away from hospital after just two days of chemotherapy.

The court made its expedited decision Thursday following a 45-minute hearing, during which lawyers for Cassandra and her mother argued that even though Cassandra is a minor, she can make her own health decisions. Cassandra is months away from turning 18.

Connecticut Rules Cancer-Stricken Teen Must Undergo Chemotherapy

In one instance she is allowed to do what she wants with her body ( as in abortion) but in another instance she is not allowed to seek a medical alternative if she wants to.

question:
Can Connecticut Force A Teenage Girl To Undergo Chemotherapy?
Can Connecticut Force A Teenage Girl To Undergo Chemotherapy Shots - Health News NPR ..
..

Because the court gave the state Department of Children and Families temporary custody of Cassandra earlier, it os not the girl's choice to make -- by law.

"Cassandra's doctors say that without treatment, she will die. They testified in previous hearings that Hodgkin lymphoma, a cancer of the lymph system, is lethal without the recommended treatment. With treatment, she has an 85 percent chance of survival."

drifter
Don't you think the state would be remiss and even evil to deny it's responsibility here? Or are you advocating lowering the age for adulthood/legal consent and responsibility?

I am done with the thread since I already got the information I wanted from it. But since you tagged me I wil answer you.

I think the family should be allowed to choose their own medical treatment.

I am reminded of this case in 2003:

It’s been 9 years since the Parker Jensen case gave us a chilling example of what happens when parental rights collide with the power of the state.

Parker, a then 12-year-old boy living in Sandy, Utah, was diagnosed with Ewing’s Sarcoma after a tiny growth was removed from beneath his tongue. His physician recommended that Parker be placed on chemotherapy immediately or face virtually no chance of surviving the cancer.

Upon learning that chemotherapy that would likely leave their son sterile—if he survived at all, Daren and Barbara Jensen insisted on getting more opinions and exploring other alternatives. Their doctor insisted that they begin treatment immediately or he would be forced to contact the Division of Child and Family Services to have Parker removed from their custody and forced to undergo chemo.

During the time that the case was battling in court, the boy lived and got better even when he was not receiving chemo.

Analysis Parker Jensen and the state as our parent St George News

Now when she does turn 18 she will have the legal right to choose for herself.

Whether I agree or you agree with her choice to not recieve treatment is really a moot point.

Anyway I mostly wanted to understand the difference of Her Body Her choice and Disir explained it.

So you can disagree with my opinion all you want about treatment, it changes nothing in regards to what I was interested in understanding about body rights.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Nope if she has that right based on it being her body her choice, she should have the right to choose her medical care.

No way the left will understand the disgusting hypocrisy in this

I did start this thread.

the left?

It's about the law.

She is a minor. The state has custody. She can choose an abortion if she wants. She cannot refuse cancer treatment until she is of age. It is the law.

how do conservatives get so stupid?