It’s Fatherhood Friday over at Dad Blogs so please click on over there and check out all the talented dad and mom bloggers offering their two cents on a variety of topics!
I know this topic will be controversial, but that’s OK. A little debate and controversy is good to stir things up from time to time. But you know what isn’t good? Debating parental rights vs. the life and death of a child while said child dies from Cancer.
That’s right, I’m sure you’ve all heard the story about Daniel Hauser and his mother Colleen. Daniel is a 13-year-old boy from Minnesota who has Hodgkins’ lymphoma. Even though this is a highly curable form of cancer with a 90 percent success rate if treated with chemotherapy, Daniel’s parents are against “poisoning” their son with chemo and instead have opted for holistic remedies inspired by Native American Indians. Colleen recently took off with her sick son after a court intervened and ordered her to get her son the chemo his body needs to successfully fight the Cancer.
And now the debate is on and the question is should the state have the authority to tell parents how to care for their kids? Furthermore, should these parents be criminally charged for neglect if they continue to watch their child die simply because they don’t believe in the proven treatment.
In my opinion, these parents are idiots and they should be held responsible should any further harm come to their son. Look, if the mother or father doesn’t believe in chemo and wants to use voo doo or salamander excrement to fight cancer, fine. They are adults and that is their choice. But that’s not the case here.
This is a child we’re talking about. A 13-year-old boy who is not capable of making this kind of decision on his own. And if the parents are so idiotic that they’d let their child die just to assert their “parental rights” and say F You to the authorities, then the state should ABSOLUTELY be able to step in and do the right thing.
Doctors said Hodgkins has a 90 percent cure rate in children treated with chemotherapy and radiation, but the survival rate drops to 5 percent without those treatments. Seriously, what more do you need to know? Chemotherapy = 90 percent success rate and a bright future. No chemotherapy = probable death at a tragically young age. If the Hausers were armed with that knowledge and yet they still chose to ignore it, then they are killing their son. I know that’s harsh, but it’s reality.
And spare me the argument about individual rights. I’m all about freedom and our rights. But if that kid was bleeding to death and the parents refused to take him to the hospital for treatment, the parents would be arrested to face criminal charges. How is this any different? The child is dying from cancer and the parents refuse to give him a treatment with a 90 percent success rate. That’s text book child endangerment. And, it’s just stupid.
What kind of parent wouldn’t move heaven and earth to save their kid? I don’t believe in God, but if someone proved God’s existence and science showed us that prayer could cure a disease that Will had, I would give up all my personal beliefs in a heart beat if it meant saving him. You do what’s best for your kid. Period. End of story. And these parents failed in that capacity, so the state had to do it for them.
Good for the state, and shame on Colleen Hauser.