Is it so wrong to accept fate and desire to live the quality of life you have left when stricken with diseases like cancer? This is the case with a Connecticut teenager, who has voiced her need to live life without harsh treatments like chemotherapy – a decision that is evidently against the wishes of the state Supreme Court.
The girl, identified only as Cassandra, has Hodgkin’s lymphoma. While it may seems unreasonable to many to refuse mainstream treatments, she is worried about what she considers risks, including heart defects, organ damage, and digestive problems. Still, the Connecticut Supreme Court has decided to continue forcing Cassandra to take the treatment. The state ruled Cassandra is not mature enough to make the decision on her own.
“I entirely understand that death will be the outcome without the chemo,” Cassandra wrote to ABC News affiliate WTNH-TV from Connecticut Children’s Medical Center, where she has been living and getting treatment. “The doctors have made that clear. But they can’t necessarily give me a ‘death date,’ so as I’ve said before, I believe in the quality of my life, not the quantity.”
Even in the land of the free, it seems individuals are forced into mainstream medical treatments against their will. The court summary said Cassandra underwent chemotherapy twice in November and then ran away from home, refusing to continue the treatment. Though even with support from the mother, along with the Cassandra’s core belief that chemo wasn’t the answer, the teen was forced to go to court after the Department of Children and Families ordered her to comply with the doctor’s recommendation.
Of course there are 2 sides of this issue, as the news video below reports.
“When experts — such as the several physicians involved in this case — tell us with certainty that a child will die as a result of leaving a decision up to a parent, then the Department has a responsibility to take action. Even if the decision might result in criticism, we have an obligation to protect the life of the child when there is consensus among the medical experts that action is required. Much of the improvements in Connecticut’s child welfare system have come from working with families voluntarily to realize solutions to family challenges.”
“Under this circumstance — when there is medical consensus that action must be taken or the child will die — the Department has a clear and urgent responsibility to save the life of this child,” DCF said.
Assistant Attorney General John Tucker said Cassandra is “irrationally refusing treatment that is lifesaving,” WTNH-TV reported. Telling your mainstream medical doctor that you’d like to forfeit chemotherapy and instead adopt an organic lifestyle full of juicing and raw nutrition to treat your own cancer could lead him or her to label you as ‘insane’, but it could also save your life. But as evidenced in one of many cases, one man with stage 3 colon cancer given a 60% chance to live for a maximum of five more years under chemotherapy decided to forfeit chemo and venture into a natural health lifestyle only to be more than satisfied 9 years later.
This is only one of many examples of safer, alternative solutions that has saved lives.
She plans to move out of the hospital when she turns 18, she wrote.
“I hope that one day if a minor is put in my position, they will not have to go through what I’m going through.”
What do you think of this case?
chemo has a 97% failure rate failure meaning most times it killed the patient not the cancer it was “treating”. cancer doesn’t even kill as many people as chemo does. what do I think should be done ? thanks for asking. convene a common law grand jury and indict the courts the judge the lawyers the dr.s anyone who willingly got involved in this family’s life on the wrong side. when the sheriff refuses to serve the warrants issue one for him too. elect a group of citizen volunteers as posse and serve them. we have the lawful processes the numbers the power and glory to finally take responsibility for ourselves. killakhazarjustforthefunofit
like Cindy implied I am stunned that any body can make $5241 in one month on the computer. try this website on `my` `prof1le`
)dxxx
Consider suing if she dies after taking all the chemo all involved on this mandatory treatment. They validate that she must have this or she will die without. They justify interfering by they can’t let a “child” die when they know she will die without treatment. Then she will not die with THE TREATMENT? Most of us know that is not reality. IF she dies by the court’s decision of treatment, this is “OK” by the law? However, not “OK” if it happens by the choice of treatment or none by the patient and family. Something seriously wrong with the law and the medical world! FREE COUNTRY-LAND OF OPPORTUNITY AND CHOICE. I think not.
Shouldn’t the state law yield to the guardianship of the parents. For they are the ones that act in her best interest.
anyone who is awake & aware knows that one human being forcing another human being against his/her will to do anything is against natural/common law! the supreme court is an illegal/treasonous institution to begin with due to their adherence to the uk crown/maritime law instead of the law of the land that the u.s. of america citizenry is suppose to be under. the supreme court idiots should be forced to do chemo and see how they like it. it’s time for we the people to all wake up and take our human rights fully back from the demiiurge who run our so-called government and various other corporate interests. 50 states of the u.s. of america (NOT the u.s. corporation) are now fully constituted (to be represented by common law courts of the people)! education yourself. the change is quickly upon us.
Against “her will”? Sorry to say, but a US 14th amendment Citizen let alone a teenager as far as the “law” is concerned is “civilly dead” (check Congressional Record- June 13,1967, pgs 15641 -15646 then if you really like to read check out, “The Rights of the Living Dead: Absent Persons in the Civil Law” written by Jeanne Louise Carriere for the Louisiana Law Review, May 1990) and considered a “ward of the state”. Yes, like “Orphan Annie” and therefore has no lawful “will” to be actioned. Common law courts (which were originally designed for those of the “peerage”) do not exist in America anymore as there is no need, as what 14th amendment citizen is “alive” to bring a claim to a common law court. They are mere civil “ghosts” either being “summoned” to court by a black robed priest– err I mean judge, or filing complaints in the civitus pleading for someone “on high” to hear their case. The moment you step into court with an attorney (interesting word you should probably look up) the court already sees you as an incompetent or imbecile as that is the role of a lawyer, to re-present them in terms more favorable to the court (NOT to your case). Parents don’t understand (and it has been designed this way) that when they signed the marriage contract they were granted a “license” (etymologically derived from the word licentiousness, oh my) they formed a corporation with the government as the principle (primary) party of all assets and profits derived from that corporation. The “child” (in fact the NAME only, however they bind the living being through the concept of surety) is considered a product of that marriage corporation. Sick but true. Unlike old America where a parent (father really) who had lawful standing was considered “owner” of that property, nowadays a biological parent who has no lawful standing, is merely only the default “guardian” which the state can intervene in (in this case, YES you WILL take the toxins my BigPharma buddies want you to take) as the guardian does not OWN the property, the STATE does. There is remedy in law, however don’t expect your local congressman, lawyer or judge to hold your hand and show you how to get yourself out of the legal mess you and the rest of this country (really the world) are in…
Sadly, this is only the tip of the iceberg…
As a follow up statement, remember the game is all about the name, or should I say NAME. At the hospital, when the birth is registered (interestingy etymology for the word “gist”) and the certificate is created, a government franchise is created, but more relevant to this topic, a NAME is created. Then when the property is abandoned seven years later ala the 1666 Cest Que Vie act, the property (the estate including the name) is presumed dead and is then claimed by the STATE by law and settled under probate (but really under intestate as you HAVE NO WILL). Now the assets of that estate (including the NAME) is managed by the state. We then further bind ourselves as surety through various other methods, but the most common is 1) The social security card, which we then operate under and as when we employ ourselves. Remember that card is government property, not YOUR card (even says it on the card). Back in the day it used to say “Employee Signature” on the part where you would sign.
Also the social insurance scheme was specifically created and applies to 14th Amendment citizens and as a 14th amendment citizen you are “civilly dead”. As abandoned property you are “civilly dead” as you have not declared yourself alive (via a living will) in law and proven you are able to exercise that will competently.
“But as evidenced in one of many cases, one man with stage 3 colon cancer given a 60% chance to live for a maximum of five more years under chemotherapy decided to forfeit chemo and venture into a natural health lifestyle only to be more than satisfied 9 years later.