It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Chemo Forced on Connecticut Teen Against Her Will

page: 9
16
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 9 2015 @ 03:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Jamie1

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Jamie1
Yes, I can see both sides.... Sremmos80's perspective is valid too. Characterizing it as rape or not, a violation of her rights or not, the States' intent is, I believe, to serve her best interests. And the opposite side that this is appalling is valid as well.

Sometimes in real life you have to make a decision, like the judge did, and sleep at night feeling like it was your best intent, and decision, and that's all you can do.

I think they have her best interests at heart too, but the road to Hell is paved with good intentions. The State absolutely has a duty to the girl, they are simply exceeding their bounds.

What they should do is force mandatory education on both parents and child, and work with them to explain why chemo is the best option.


I did the proverbial sleeping on this and with a clear head, thought about both sides.

17-years old's are very impressionable, and in my experience, very idealistic and naive in their views. So let's take the girl out of the equation. Let's assume she's legally 7, not 17.

Now it's a question of the State deciding to take, by force of gun, a child away from a parent.

If the parent was abusing the child, or putting the child in danger proactively, then it's obvious. The State comes in and protects the child.

This is different.

The child is sick. The State is coming in, at the point of a gun, and kidnapping a child from a parent to force the child to receive treatment because the State chooses one form of treatment over what the parent wants.

The State's expert witnesses claims the treatment has an 80-85% chance of keeping her alive. But doesn't say for how long, or what the side effects may be. The State's witness also claims the girl has a 100% certainty of dying without the treatment.

If I'm the judge, I have to take custody of the girl based on that testimony, not from a legal perspective, from a human perspective.

The beauty of the whole process, whatever the outcome, is that we do have a legal system in place, however flawed, to resolve the situation. The girl's mother is now appealing the decision.

Keyboard warriors going thorough hours of mental masturbation aren't going to change it one way or the other.

All we can do is send our thoughts and prayers to the girl.


I like your process. Well reasoned. We all have a 100% chance of dying with or without treatment. The only reason a judge cares is because of the money lost. I don't see how anyone should have legal standing in this case, that a judge should ever hear it. Let her live her way.



 
16
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join