Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Do parents have any rights? PIOG

Posted by on May. 24, 2009 at 1:58 AM
  • 26 Replies

With the several cases that have come up as of late as to where a parent can refuse medical treatment of a child, do you feel we have reached a slippery slope that could lead to the state enforcing all medical treatment irregardless of a parents wishes up to and including vaccinations and behavioral medications?

It seems I recall the reason people can refuse vaccinations and/or any medications is because a person cannot be forced to undergo medical treatment of any kind against their religion or their personal spiritual beliefs. Yet, here we are now with that very thing being done.

Are parents right to refuse treatment for thier child in jepardy?

After all Maryland forced vaccinations in November 2007.

by on May. 24, 2009 at 1:58 AM
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Replies (1-10):
user521
by on May. 24, 2009 at 2:04 AM

Im an Army mom.  If my children and I moved their would they have to have vaccs to attend school or could I still file the against moral beliefs work?

CafeMom Tickers
stormcris
by on May. 24, 2009 at 2:08 AM

They have medical and religious only. However, I have no idea what the judges allowed during their court hearing where if parents did not provide proof of vaccination or exemption they would go to jail.

Quoting user521:

Im an Army mom.  If my children and I moved their would they have to have vaccs to attend school or could I still file the against moral beliefs work?


Vaerdna
by on May. 24, 2009 at 2:30 AM
This is a touchy one.
Personally I'm not sure exactly what I believe. I mean, I know what I believe, but I don't know which side I would be on in this whole thing.
I do think that a parent should have a right to deny vaccines or behavioral drugs. I do think that a parent should be able to deny risky medical treatment.
I do think that every parent should take their child in for check ups though, and any denial of medical treatment should be done with a doctor's knowledge. If that makes any sense...
Let me explain, using the two most popular cases at the moment:

Leilani Neumann was found guilty in her daughter's death. Her daughter had diabetes, but was never taken to a doctor or diagnosed until after death. Her parents chose to pray for her healing, even though fluids and insulin could have saved her life if administered even minutes before her death.
In this case, I am sickened. I think she should have been taken to the doctor. Her parents could have prayed for her just as easily over a hospital bed as they could at home. Medical treatment could have been given, and she would be alive.

There is also a woman in Minnesota I believe that has denied treatment for her son's cancer. Unfortunately I do not have details on this case, but from what I have read her son has a cancer that does not have a guaranteed treatment. She opted not to try a controversial treatment, and she is now fleeing a court order requiring that she allow her son to be treated, even though he would still have a fairly high likelihood of dying.
In this case, I think the state went too far. I applaud the woman for taking her son in though, and for getting the diagnosis to know that this was not an easily treatable disease. I think she has the right to let her son die in peace, and she should not be forced to try something that might make his last days miserable.
cjsmom0206
by on May. 24, 2009 at 2:33 AM

I disagree. I feel that when it can be considered medical abuse then someone needs to advocate for the child.

stormcris
by on May. 24, 2009 at 2:37 AM

Ok but that isn't my point if the courts and CPS can make these calls on these type things what is to keep them at bay on other things?What is to keep them from saying not medicating an ADHD child is not deemed medical abuse?

Quoting cjsmom0206:

I disagree. I feel that when it can be considered medical abuse then someone needs to advocate for the child.


kdasgirl
by on May. 24, 2009 at 2:38 AM

This is a hard question to answer. I think that the decision should ultimately rest with the parent. I am just conflicted as to where the child's choice should come into play. Yes as a parent we are responsible for our children until they are 18 (in most cases) but most kids by at least high school can make a lot of decisions on their own. In the end I suppose it would have to be a case by case thing as to whether there should be any Government involvement. That seems like a lot of work but there is no way to say yes or no. All situations are different .*shrug*



PhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucketPhotobucket
stormcris
by on May. 24, 2009 at 2:39 AM

I understand the conflict I have the same issues running through my head but I just wonder where the line will be drawn on medical abuse.

Quoting Vaerdna:

This is a touchy one.
Personally I'm not sure exactly what I believe. I mean, I know what I believe, but I don't know which side I would be on in this whole thing.
I do think that a parent should have a right to deny vaccines or behavioral drugs. I do think that a parent should be able to deny risky medical treatment.
I do think that every parent should take their child in for check ups though, and any denial of medical treatment should be done with a doctor's knowledge. If that makes any sense...
Let me explain, using the two most popular cases at the moment:

Leilani Neumann was found guilty in her daughter's death. Her daughter had diabetes, but was never taken to a doctor or diagnosed until after death. Her parents chose to pray for her healing, even though fluids and insulin could have saved her life if administered even minutes before her death.
In this case, I am sickened. I think she should have been taken to the doctor. Her parents could have prayed for her just as easily over a hospital bed as they could at home. Medical treatment could have been given, and she would be alive.

There is also a woman in Minnesota I believe that has denied treatment for her son's cancer. Unfortunately I do not have details on this case, but from what I have read her son has a cancer that does not have a guaranteed treatment. She opted not to try a controversial treatment, and she is now fleeing a court order requiring that she allow her son to be treated, even though he would still have a fairly high likelihood of dying.
In this case, I think the state went too far. I applaud the woman for taking her son in though, and for getting the diagnosis to know that this was not an easily treatable disease. I think she has the right to let her son die in peace, and she should not be forced to try something that might make his last days miserable.


cjsmom0206
by on May. 24, 2009 at 2:41 AM

This is a life and death situation, which she chose not to seek medical intervention of any kind. ADHD is a little more complex then that, and is often misdiagnosed, not to mention isn't going to kill a person.

Quoting stormcris:

Ok but that isn't my point if the courts and CPS can make these calls on these type things what is to keep them at bay on other things?What is to keep them from saying not medicating an ADHD child is not deemed medical abuse?

Quoting cjsmom0206:

I disagree. I feel that when it can be considered medical abuse then someone needs to advocate for the child.



mom2jade
by on May. 24, 2009 at 2:43 AM

nope whatever we do is wrong


cpmom610
by on May. 24, 2009 at 2:43 AM

you cant compare ADHD meds to chemo. a child not taking adhd meds will not kill him. but a kid not getting chemo will kill him.

 that family could have done the chemo and the natural meds shit at the same time. but what does she do takes her kid to mexico. you know everything is ever so healthy and clean there.

Quoting stormcris:

Ok but that isn't my point if the courts and CPS can make these calls on these type things what is to keep them at bay on other things?What is to keep them from saying not medicating an ADHD child is not deemed medical abuse?

Quoting cjsmom0206:

I disagree. I feel that when it can be considered medical abuse then someone needs to advocate for the child.




Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)