Friday, January 9, 2015

Connecticut teen with cancer must undergo chemotherapy treatment, court rules

Via Adam


Connecticut's Supreme Court has ruled a 17-year-old girl with cancer must receive chemotherapy even though she no longer wants the treatment.

The court rejected the request of the girl, identified as Cassandra C. because she does not want to reveal her last name, to make her own decisions regarding her medical care even though she won't turn 18 until September, reports CBS News.

According to the Associated Press, the case centered on whether the girl is mature enough to determine how to treat her Hodgkin lymphoma, with which she was diagnosed last September. Several other states recognize the mature minor doctrine.

She, with her mother, Jackie Fortin, of Windsor Locks, Conn., had fought against the six-month course of chemotherapy, the AP reports.

CBS reports the family searched for alternative treatments but a judge ordered Cassandra to undergo chemotherapy. She ran away from home after two treatments, and the Connecticut Department of Children and Families (DCF) placed place her in protective custody, according to CBS.

She is confined in a room at Connecticut Children's Medical Center in Hartford, where she's being forced to undergo chemotherapy, which doctors said would give her an 85 percent chance of survival, reports the AP. Without it, they said, there was a near certainty of death within two years.
In a column in the Hartford Courant, Cassandra says the ordeal has been emotionally harrowing.

More @ Cleveland

18 comments:

  1. I read about this young lady's decision, and it should have been hers to make. Informed consent does not mean that you get the decision taken away from you if the Police State of Connecticut disagrees. Very scary. Forcing a minor to accept treatment against her will... what next???
    Here is another point of view from a physician. There are much worse ways to die, and the horrors of cancer is more about the treatment.

    http://rt.com/uk/219251-cancer-best-death-doctor/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks and can't believe the link and shall post.

      Delete
    2. One size does not fit all when it comes to treating cancer. It depends on the individual's overall health, the aggressiveness of the tumor and the success rate to treat. If there is only a 5% chance of surviving one year and the treatment is extremely difficult and painful and costly, then why go that route? If your chance of survival is high, then go for it no matter the cost. SCextremist has it right about access to abortion - the girl gets to make that decision.

      Delete
    3. Yes, but the doctor lumped all together and I am sure on purpose to try and further their collectivist agenda.

      Delete
  2. But if she wanted an abortion the court would have claimed the matter already settled; "It's her body, she can as she pleases."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Excellent point. The inmates are in charge of the asylum.

      Delete
  3. Yes, he did do that, and that was wrong of him to do because there is a bigger Agenda in all of this. Now the State is forcing someone into treatment, but we will be hearing far more stories about the opposite happening.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Ive been reading about these cps kidnappings. The $ train travels from the feds to local custody people/juvenile centers and cps (state level). The minor children are subjected to research medical procedures without any parental input or approval parents are effectively severed from their children
    The precedent is already set. They get away with it under the guise of misteatment when parents dont allow experimental medical procedures on their children

    or seeking a second opinion
    When the state is in control of "healthcare" your body and your children's are no longer in your control.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks and in case you haven't seen this.

      The New Jersey incident. What motivates bureaucrats.
      http://freenorthcarolina.blogspot.com/2011/11/new-jersey-incident-what-motivates.html

      Delete
  5. Medicalkidnap.com

    Now home births are verbotten. My thinking is that medicals are aiding in the collection of dna at birth. In addition to the "voluntary" blood draws at traffic stops.

    Forget privacy. Forget security.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lord only knows, I'd believe anything these days.

      Delete
  6. 16,000 doctors will retire this year, in Mass. alone. ACA driven. I just wonder how many Conn. will lose?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We're probably going to end up with nurse practitioners for the most part if Obamacare isn't repealed.

      Delete
    2. Most certainly. The same thing will occur all across America.

      Delete
    3. Perfect.
      new hires will be doctors who support collectivism. Drs that wont hesitate to ask/report you for owning a gun. im sure they are being trained this way already since progressives run education.

      Delete