Where are the keep your laws of my body libs here? Forced chemo?

[Q?UOTE="Syriusly, post: 10471843, member: 51902"]
Connecticut Teen Fighting State Over Forced Chemotherapy Treatments - Hartford Courant

These same liberals would throw shitfits if she had to get a sonogram for an abortion, but they will force her to take chemotherapy?

She is 17 years old- she is old enough to be go to a judge and ask to be emancipated.

Something is odd about this story- and I think we are not being told the whole thing. The girl ran away from home to avoid the treatments- and then was picked up as a runaway.

But who was forcing her into treatment? Until then she would have been under her mother's custody- so was her mother forcing her into treatment?

Anyway- she should be able to be legally emancipated and then make her own decision- I have known other 17 year old who gone through the process. The State has an obligation to protect minors- but I believe an emancipated 17 year old would be treated legally as an adult.[/QUOTE]
Is she working? Can she support herself? Has she proved that she can make sound financial decisions on her own? She has the burden of proof that she is an adult. It's more than just wanting to be emancipated.
 
okay, so it's really not the same as an abortion. It's a child trying to kill herself and the state stepping in to stop her.

The girl is 17. While she is not legally an adult, she is close enough to understand the consequences of her decision. Understanding how bad chemo is, I think she should have the choice of making the decision for herself, even if it means that she will die. At the same time, I think she is making a big mistake, because the five year survival rate is above 90% for Stage 1, and is still 65% for Stage 4. This girl has the chance at a living a long life with treatment, but the bottom line is that it should be her decision.
 
She is 17. Old enough to decide whether she wants chemo or not and what the consequences are. I refused chemo and radiation as well. My choice. My body. I did my homework. But I am not 17 years old, either. My doc was not thrilled with my decision, but tough titties. Or rather..titty.
 

First link didn't work (the Courant DOES require a subscription), this one does.

I agree with her completely. After watching two people go through chemo, I say: not fuckin' worth it. Making a dog suffer the way a cancer patient suffers would get you locked up.

I agree with you to a point. Either way, I agree that it should be the girl's decision, but she needs to understand completely that not getting treatment means she will die. While chemo is horrible, the success rate for Hodgkins Lymphoma is very high, as high as 90% plus for those with Stage 1, and still 65% for Stage 4. She already has poison in her body. That poison is her cancer.
 
And there is no guarantee it will work anyway. Like I said..I did my homework. She is 17. She probably did her homework as well. HER choice.
 
By liberal standards it's her body and no one can tell her what to do with body. Mind your own business.

I think that she should be able to refuse treatment if that is her wish, as long as it is an informed consent.

That's what we have courts for, to determine she fully appreciates the magnitude of her decision.
Why don't you feel that way about abortion?
 
Why don't you feel that way about abortion?

Because fetuses aren't people.

Because I just want to fuck the religious assholes who get upset about abortion over.

Because I know that you can't practically outlaw abortion. Every country that has tried has failed.

Take you pick.
I'm talking about how you say it's a woman's body and you can't tell her what to do with it, but in this case you want to tell her she has to get chemotherapy. Dumbass
 
I'm talking about how you say it's a woman's body and you can't tell her what to do with it, but in this case you want to tell her she has to get chemotherapy. Dumbass

Oh, sorry, I just had some funny idea that children really can't make life and death decisions about htemselves as a matter of law.

Which has nothing to do with elective procedures that your sky pixie doesn't like.
 
I'm talking about how you say it's a woman's body and you can't tell her what to do with it, but in this case you want to tell her she has to get chemotherapy. Dumbass

Oh, sorry, I just had some funny idea that children really can't make life and death decisions about htemselves as a matter of law.

Which has nothing to do with elective procedures that your sky pixie doesn't like.
In abortion you say you cannot tell a woman what to do with her body, but in this case your all for it. Hypocrite.
 
In abortion you say you cannot tell a woman what to do with her body, but in this case your all for it. Hypocrite.

I don't think a 17 year old has a sufficient understanding of mortality so comprehend, "If you don't get this treatment, you are going to DIE!!!" She is thinking, "Oh my GOd, my hair is going to fall out?
But a 15 year old should be old enough to demand an abortion without consent from her parents, right?
 
In abortion you say you cannot tell a woman what to do with her body, but in this case your all for it. Hypocrite.

I don't think a 17 year old has a sufficient understanding of mortality so comprehend, "If you don't get this treatment, you are going to DIE!!!" She is thinking, "Oh my GOd, my hair is going to fall out?
But a 15 year old should be old enough to demand an abortion without consent from her parents, right?

uh, yeah. Abortion isn't a life-changing event.
 
In abortion you say you cannot tell a woman what to do with her body, but in this case your all for it. Hypocrite.

I don't think a 17 year old has a sufficient understanding of mortality so comprehend, "If you don't get this treatment, you are going to DIE!!!" She is thinking, "Oh my GOd, my hair is going to fall out?
But a 15 year old should be old enough to demand an abortion without consent from her parents, right?

uh, yeah. Abortion isn't a life-changing event.
It is for thousands of women who regret for life for having an abortion.
 

Forum List

Back
Top