Subscribe: Comments on: The Nanny State vs. The Family
http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/07/12/the-nanny-state-vs-the-family/feed/
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade B rated
Language: English
Tags:
abraham  accomack county  cancer  chemotherapy  choice  family  make  nanny state  parents  state family  state  treatment  william 
Rate this Feed
Rate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feed
Rate this feed 1 starRate this feed 2 starRate this feed 3 starRate this feed 4 starRate this feed 5 star

Comments (0)

Feed Details and Statistics Feed Statistics
Preview: Comments on: The Nanny State vs. The Family

Comments on: The Nanny State vs. The Family



Life. Liberty. Property. Defending individual freedom and liberty, one post at a time.



Last Build Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 06:48:48 +0000

 



By: my 2 cents

Sat, 22 Jul 2006 03:19:58 +0000

Money is the root of all evil. It is all about the money. I bet the social worker might get a reward from somewhere?



By: The Liberty Papers»Blog Archive » The Nanny State vs. The Family Part II

Sat, 22 Jul 2006 00:13:59 +0000

[...] Last week, I wrote about Abraham Cherrix, a 16 year-old boy in Accomack County, Virginia in the middle of a custody battle between his parents and the Accomack County Social Services Department. The issue at hand, of course, was Abraham’s cancer treatments. Abraham and his parents made the choice to discontinue his chemotherapy and try alternative medicine. The state, however, claimed that it new better and convinced a judge to issue an order effectively giving Accomack County joint legal custody of Abraham. [...]



By: Accidental Verbosity

Thu, 20 Jul 2006 14:58:34 +0000

Carnival of the Vanities #200 - Acidman Memorial Edition The Liberty Papers brings us the sorry case of the nanny state versus the family, in which we learn that the government owns you and your children, so how could you possibly make decisions for them.



By: Dorothy Thompson

Wed, 19 Jul 2006 01:36:47 +0000

I know the Cherrix family personally as I live fifteen minutes from their house and have watched Abraham grow up. I am utterly in shock that the court system would drag this family in and make them go through this. Abraham should be home getting better instead of putting himself through this stress. I talked to his mom this morning and she said she's not heard the verdict yet. She said Abraham was doing well and hanging in there.



By: IndianCowboy

Fri, 14 Jul 2006 03:18:09 +0000

argh, I'm not going to get on my 'we at least need to study herbals' soapbox right now, but I will say that while Hoxsey's is crap, there are some pretty effective thigns out there. i've seen them work firsthand. the paternalism of the medical and public health community continues to shock and appall me. Probably a bad thing since I'll be a part of it for the rest of my life.



By: Siobhan

Thu, 13 Jul 2006 21:47:47 +0000

I agree with William fully that the boy has the right to choose his treatment, especially when chemotherapy has not only failed, but brought him to such a weakened state. There are many documented instances of cancers going into remission without conventional treatment and I would suspect the chances of that happening are greatly increased when one has a healthy diet and lifestyle, so I wish him the best in that venture. My sister had Hodkins and both my mother and grandmother had colon cancer (We're a healthy family, I swear! Yet I suspect I'll have my turn). My grandmother recently passed because her cancer returned and at her old age, she know the chemotherapy would do more damage then it was worth. Some people are just too weak to withstand it. You are, like William stated, adding poison in the hope that it kills the cancer before it kills the patient. Watching all three go through chemotherapy I saw some very weak moments, but none requiring them to be carried. Some bodies just don't like having toxins pumped into them... imagine that. Cases like this bring up a lot of questions about the rights of parents against the opinions of the medical community. If doctors and non-medically trained social workers are able force treatments on an unwilling patient, then the door will open for further invasion of a patients rights. In this case I guess I also have to wonder about what would happen if the court does order the treatment and the treatment kills him...



By: Doug Mataconis

Thu, 13 Jul 2006 14:36:12 +0000

William, I know that chemotherapy can be beneficial and, often is. My mother suffered from Ovarian Cancer and, at least in the beginning, chemotherapy worked and she survived more than five years. I saw firsthand, however, the effect that the chemicals had on her body so I think I have some understanding of what Abraham is talking about. At the same time, its probably true that he will die without the chemotherapy but, of course, there's no guarantee that he will survive if he undergoes another round of chemo either. Finally, make no mistake.....I am not endorsing the therapy that he and his family are choosing. I am endorsing their right to make that choice free of state interference. You and I may not agree with the medical decisions he and his family are making, but they have, I submit, every right to make them. Let me ask this question, if Abraham were 19 and making this decision, what would your position be ? Should the state be able to force an adult citizen to undergo medical procedures when they don't want to ? If so, on what authority ?



By: Skeptico

Thu, 13 Jul 2006 14:22:47 +0000

William Alexander is right on the money about the choices this kid is facing. For a more detailed explanation you should read Respectful Insolence today: http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2006/07/choosing_quackery_over_evidencebased_med.php



By: William Alexander

Thu, 13 Jul 2006 14:12:24 +0000

I agree with your concept that it should be between the boy and his parents. However, the flavor of your editorial places chemo in a biased negative light. If this boy chooses the alternative described he will die, period. If he takes the appropriate chemo he will likely have no further lymphoid cancer for 2-3 decades. You don't have the background to understand that this is not the choice between two equal alternatives,however it is still not the state's choice. It is the family's choice in my opinion.



By: Below The Beltway

Wed, 12 Jul 2006 17:04:23 +0000

The Nanny State vs. The Family ...