Blowing Smoke

Thursday, June 16, 2005

Interesting story about parents who lost custody of their daughter for not following up chemotherapy with radiation treatment. They're claiming they were misled as to how necessary or useful the radiation would be relative to the risks, but I'm interested in the first part.

Especially in a situation like this where no therapy is 100% successful, are they wrong for evaluating the risks and benefits differently from the doctors? I mean, it turns out they're wrong, but does making the decision make them bad parents?

My thinking is this is hypocritical. We don't punish parents for not taking their children for checkups that could catch these diseases early, or if they let their children fail in school. These are from sources as authoritative as the cancer specialist, but more people make these choices.

Interested in other thoughts. I don't know if I have a conclusion on this one yet, although I'm leaning toward not removing custody.

posted by Unknown 1:27 PM | 2 comments

Comments:

I think this is a very interesting issue, and I will be thinking about it.

However, what is more compelling is the fact that you have made three (3) posts in one (1) workday. One workday, part of which was likely spent surfing a site whose mascot is green with purple horns...

# posted by

Anonymous : 4:45 PM

I guess the question is, where do we draw that line?

Are "bad parents" ones who don't feed their kids?

Are "bad parents" ones who beat their kids?

Are "bad parents" ones who don't give their kids chemotherapy?

Are "bad parents" ones who teach their kids from the Vedas rather than the Bible?

all SORTS of questions there...I'd try to answer them--but this one's your blog!!!

# posted by

Sameer : 5:59 PM