# Too much government intervention?



## seabass (Sep 26, 2002)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30763438/

Should parents have the final say on the medical treatment their children should have?


----------



## Bustem36 (Feb 5, 2008)

I don't think the government should be involved in people's personal lives...the only question I really have is where were their religious beliefs before his first treatment?


----------



## omegax (Oct 25, 2006)

I certainly don't want to make a blanket policy, but in questions of life or death, I put refusing treatment in with neglect. It's something we can't allow parents to do. I don't think that anyone disagrees that as a society, we sometimes need to protect kids from their own parents' decisions. This one just so happens to be one case where I'm staunchly pro-intervention.

We all draw a line between rights and the value of life. As much as I don't feel like talking abortion, I do feel like the same issue, in a way. In my own case, I guess I don't really feel the need to probe exactly how I draw the life/rights line in this discussion.


----------



## omegax (Oct 25, 2006)

Bustem36 said:


> I don't think the government should be involved in people's personal lives...the only question I really have is where were their religious beliefs before his first treatment?


Let me ask you this: When would intervention be appropriate, if ever? I would assume if the parents' beliefs called for human sacrifice, you'd want to intervene... not that I'm comparing the two, I'm just making an extreme case to see if there _is_ a line you'd draw where intervention is necessary. Is your line that the parents aren't actively trying to harm the kid?


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Good grief that's a tough one. I would like to know what the alternate treatment is and what it's level of success is. If it's good let the parents and the kid decide. The kid is 13 he needs some control over his own life even if he isn't a legal adult yet.

That magic age of 18 or 21 is great when it comes to alcohol and protecting kids from things, but when it comes to life or death this kid needs more of a voice. Kids are not stupid they are often just foolish about every day life. This is different.

If the other method had a comparable success rate the decision would be easy, let the parents make the call. If it only gives the kid 20 percent I think I would have to say override the parental decision. I hate to do that, and something like this may be the only thing that would make me do it. If that is contradictory to some of my other thoughts so be it. If the alternative method has a 50% chance let the kid make the call. Make sure you ask with no parent present.

All I can say is let us all hope we are never in this predicament. I wish the best for everyone involved.


----------



## Bustem36 (Feb 5, 2008)

omegax said:


> Bustem36 said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think the government should be involved in people's personal lives...the only question I really have is where were their religious beliefs before his first treatment?
> ...


I wrote this in the mindset of not exactly knowing exactly where I stand on this. I guess I'm along the lines of Plainsman. It's a really tough decision without all the facts and once this door opens then many others are soon to follow with government making these choices for parents.

I can not put myself in the mindset of the parents but can say I would choose the treatment that gave my child, wife, mother, or who ever it may be the best chance for life. I guess my question still stands though where were their beliefs during his first treatment. This isn't a small decision and you would have to believe there faith would have been a big part of all decisions.


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

another example is of that lady that was on the Feeding tube and was clinicaly dead. I can't remember everything. But think of those situations. Loads of medical costs are piling up because people are holding on to a thread of hope when there is none.


----------



## fhalum (Oct 7, 2008)

Bustem36 said:


> the only question I really have is where were their religious beliefs before his first treatment?


For what it's worth, I think I read that the first treatment was done because at that point in time, the boy was very ill and the doctors said it had to be done right away as a life-saving effort. After the fact, though, the mother said she felt coerced into the decision and started to seek out other opinions and refuse additional treatment.

Definitely a tough one. Kind of reminds me in some respects to the Terry Schiavo (sp?) case from a while back. Who has the right to make those decisions? Definitely a hard one.

I think that it's one of those things that seems to simple at face value until you start to dig in and consider all the other items at stake...


----------



## swift (Jun 4, 2004)

The boy is a minor with a very treatable disease. His parents hocus/pocus religious is a death sentance. In 5 years let him make an informed decision. But as it is now the parents aren't acting in his best behalf. That faith is only as old as the patient is. Remove him from the home and save his life so he can grow up to be a parent someday.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Swift do you know what the alternate treatment was? It would be interesting. I had wondered if they wanted to go to Mexico or France? I don't know if it is true or not, but you know how the rumor mill works? I had heard there are very good alternative treatments that our food and drug administration had not approved in this country yet. I thought maybe that was their choice or something. Hard to know what to say when I only have 10% of the facts.


----------



## fhalum (Oct 7, 2008)

Plainsman said:


> Swift do you know what the alternate treatment was?


I'm not Swift, but as I recall, the alternate treatment was drinking ionized water and following a particular diet.


----------



## swift (Jun 4, 2004)

Special diet is what was stated in the article. Remember back when Michael Landon was dying of colon cancer the big thing was kelation therapy and coffee ground enemas. When the diagnosis is terminal who cares how you treat it as long as the patient is okay with it. In this case it is not terminal unless treatment is with held. What would happen to his parent if they loaded a pistol and put it in his hand and said God wants you to come home now. Bang he is dead and the parents are criminals. In this case he will still be dead but his parents will continue to make bad decisions. They should be tried for negligent homicide if this boy dies from Hodgkins after their diet doesn't work.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

the state should protect children, and provide the best care science allows

if he was an adult then the decision should be his not the states

I cannot stand these extreme religious zealots of any religion


----------



## HUNTNFISHND (Mar 16, 2004)

Bobm said:


> the state should protect children, and provide the best care science allows
> 
> if he was an adult then the decision should be his not the states
> 
> I cannot stand these extreme religious zealots of any religion


So if a child is in a car accident and on life support who should be allowed to "pull the plug" so to speak, the parents or the state?

In my opinion, this is a decision that should only be held by the family, the boy and his parents are the ones who need to come to grips with the outcome and everyone else should mind their own business!

This case is going to set some very dangerous precedents!


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

Bobm said:


> the state should protect children, and provide the best care science allows
> 
> if he was an adult then the decision should be his not the states
> 
> I cannot stand these extreme religious zealots of any religion


 :beer:

separation between church and state?


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> separation between church and state?


I guess I read to fast and missed the part swift talked about. If that's the case then I would go along with the judge.

TK33 you just about made me go the other way. Separation of church and state means the state minds it's own business. This comes close if not violates separation of church and state. Many people have the intent that was in that letter turned around. The state getting their nose into things violates the 1st amendment. However, the individual can make his political decisions based on his religion and it's none of the governments business. The separation of church and state is not in the constitution, but it's a good idea if interpreted correctly. It's telling the government hands off. This way the government can never push a specific religion. For example Obama can't buy us all rugs and make us bow to the east.


----------



## Bowstring (Nov 27, 2006)

Chuck Smith said:


> another example is of that lady that was on the Feeding tube and was clinicaly dead. I can't remember everything. But think of those situations. Loads of medical costs are piling up because people are holding on to a thread of hope when there is none.


Then there is a situation like this,

Coma Patient Recovers After Twenty Years

Terry Wallis was barely conscious for twenty years after a car accident - three years ago he started speaking again. A short time later he was able to move his arms and legs.

Doctors say his brain gradually started rewiring itself. Scientists found that cells in a relatively undamaged part of his brain had created new axons. Axons are long nerve fibres that pass messages between neurons.

When Wallis came out of his semi-conscious state he thought it was still 1984.

You can read about this in the Journal of Clinical Investigation.

At first his speech was slurred. The first word he uttered was 'Mom'. His doctors were amazed that he managed to make any recovery at all after so many years. They started tracking the areas of his brain for growth and changes in activity levels.

Even though he has recovered movement of his limbs, he is not yet able to walk or feed himself unaided.

Wallis had tumbled over a guardrail in his pickup truck and fell 25 feet into a riverbed. He was 19 years old. Doctors had given him little chance of survival.

Henning Voss, Weill Medical College's Citigroup Biomedical Imaging Center, lead author, said "I believe it's a very, very slow self-healing process of the brain."

The researchers believe that Wallis' brain may have been seeking out new pathways to re-establish functional connections.

Even though what happened to Wallis is extremely unusual, scientists say doctors may have to rethink how they treat comatose patients.

Written by: Christian Nordqvist
Editor: Medical News Today
Copyright: Medical News Today
Not to be reproduced without permission of Medical News Today

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/46558.php

hard decisions when it comes to someones life. These are rare I'm sure but how would you make the decision? Money? What price do we put on life?

I had to make a decision for my mother last summer, its not a easy thing to do.


----------



## Candiru (Aug 18, 2005)

The parents of this girl are currently on trial for second degree reckless homicide. Punishable by up to 25 years in prison.

Parents charged in diabetes death
They didn't get medical help for sick daughter, 11
By Bill Glauber and Bill Glauber of the Journal Sentinel

Posted: Apr. 29, 2008

Mark Hoffman

Dale and Leilani Neumann enter the courtroom for their initial appearance Wednesday in Marathon County Circuit Court in Wausau.

AP

Madeline Neumann died from an undiagnosed and treatable form of diabetes.

Even as her 11-year-old daughter lay dying on a mattress on the floor of the family dining room on Easter Sunday, Leilani Neumann never wavered in her belief in the power of prayer.

"We just thought it was a spiritual attack and we prayed for her," Neumann said, according to a police report. "My husband, Dale, was crying and mentioned taking Kara to the doctor, and I said the Lord's going to heal her and we continued to pray."

Prayer didn't save Madeline Kara Neumann, who died of untreated diabetes March 23.

And now, the law is poised to come down hard on the girl's parents, Leilani and Dale Neumann, who were both charged with second-degree reckless homicide Monday by Marathon County District Attorney Jill Falstad.

If convicted, the parents face maximum sentences of 25 years in prison and a $100,000 fine.

The parents are scheduled to make their first court appearance Wednesday in Marathon County Circuit Court.

The Neumanns, of Weston, could not be reached for comment. Their attorney, Gene Linehan, also declined comment, according to a receptionist at his Wausau office.

Prosecutors said they looked at the "progression of the illness" as they weighed charges in the case.

"By that Saturday (the day before the girl's death) you had an 11-year-old child who wasn't eating, so she wasn't getting any nourishment, she wasn't taking in any fluids, she wasn't walking, she was struggling to get to the bathroom," Falstad said. "She really was very vulnerable and helpless. And it seemed apparent that everybody knew that. As her illness progressed to the next morning being comatose . . . it just is very, very surprising, shocking that she wasn't allowed medical prevention (attention).

"She had a disease that was treatable and her death could have been prevented," Falstad said.

The Neumanns, who own a coffee shop in Weston, have three other children who are living with relatives in the area under an agreement with authorities.

'People of faith'
The Neumanns have said they don't believe in any organized religion or faith but believe that healing comes through prayer.

During an interview with Everest Metro Police, Dale Neumann said he and his family are "people of faith." According to one family member interviewed by police, the Neumanns are Pentecostal and were starting a small ministry at their coffee shop.

According to the police report, made available with the charging documents, Dale Neumann said "throughout the interview that he and his family do not need any traditional medical intervention nor do they 'believe' in it."

The document also states: "Neumann said his family never gets sick and if they would, prayer and God would heal them."

The Neumanns both said they noticed a change in Kara's health around two weeks before her death.

"(Dale) Neumann said that he really didn't think she was ill but rather said that he thought her symptoms were due to Madeline's reaching puberty," the document said. The family called their daughter Kara, although authorities also refer to her as Madeline in documents.

Dale Neumann said on the Friday before his daughter died he noticed she was "a little more tired," but that she ate a McDonald's meal without any problems. By Saturday he noted the girl "seemed to act like she had a fever" while her breathing seemed a little labored.

Meanwhile, Leilani Neumann told police that by Saturday, "Kara was laying on the couch. Her legs looked skinny and blue. I didn't realize how skinny she was. We took her to my bed where I got her warm. I thought it was a spiritual attack. We stayed by her side nonstop and we prayed.

"I asked Kara if she loved Jesus and she shook her head yes."

Later Saturday, "Kara got up to go to the bathroom and fell off the toilet," Leilani Neumann told police.

Dale Neumann told police he thought his daughter was getting better on Sunday but that at one point he tried to sit her up but she was unable to remain up.

The investigator said he used the term "unconscious" to describe the girl's condition, according to the report, while Dale Neumann "preferred to say that she was 'in sleep mode.' "

Dale Neumann said Kara couldn't communicate and wasn't taking any water.

By noon, the family contacted another couple, Randall and Althea Wormgoor.

The Wormgoors had followed the Neumanns from California to Wisconsin, a relationship apparently stoked by religious as well as potential business ties. There was talk of opening a second coffee shop in the area that the Wormgoors would operate, the police report says.

The Wormgoors arrived at the home 30 minutes before Kara stopped breathing, Dale Neumann said.

Randall Wormgoor encouraged Dale Neumann to call for medical help but the father "said he remained confident and steadfast in his belief that prayer would heal Madeline," according to an interview Dale Neumann gave to police.

Dale Neumann said he heard a "commotion" coming from the room where his daughter was lying down and that he began CPR efforts. One of the Wormgoors called 911.

Dale Neumann told investigators that "given the same set of circumstances with another child, he would not waiver in his faith and confidence in the healing power of prayer," according to the interview statement.

Police also said an e-mail Dale Neumann sent at 4:58 p.m. on March 22, the day before Kara's death, showed that the parents were aware their daughter was very ill.

The subject line of the email was: "Help our daughter needs emergency prayer!!!!" The e-mail was send to AmericasLastDays, an online ministry run by David Eells.

Case could set precedent
Falstad, the district attorney, said the case is likely to be precedent-setting in Wisconsin.

"There has been a great deal of discussion regarding the availability of a 'religious defense' in this case," Falstad said in a prepared statement to announce the charges. "In our nation, we have a constitutional guarantee of freedom of religion. We also give parents leeway in matters of child rearing. However, neither is absolute. In this case, it was necessary to weigh freedom of religion and parenting rights against the state's interests in protecting children."

Wisconsin state law appears to allow an exemption from child abuse charges for parents who engage in treatment by spiritual means through prayer. But the exemption applies only if the use of prayer alone is the basis for charges.

Prosecutors say that exemption does not extend to homicide cases.

Shawn F. Peters, a University of Wisconsin-Madison teacher and author of "When Prayer Fails: Faith Healing, Children and the Law," said the exemption for prayer could still impact the case.

"I think the prosecutor did the best she could with the law she has," he said


----------



## Candiru (Aug 18, 2005)

It is a tough call on these cases. I hate Gov't interference as much as anyone. I think you have to give the benefit of the doubt to the minor and protecting them. Parents do not always know best or are just plain nuts. It is hard to imagine a kid that was brought up in a sheltered and radical religious enviroment being able to make a reasoned and rational decision. Things pretty much need to be handled on a case-by-case basis.


----------

