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.

 

Big win for new age medicine fans and faith healers!

page: 3
5
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 12:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi

originally posted by: muse7

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: muse7

This is very sad. I read about it yesterday and thought about posting it but didn't feel like dealing with the backlash hate that will be sure to come so brace yourself.

Here is another source with some info.


After Makayla said she had a vision of Jesus in the hospital, she wrote a letter to her doctors asking to stop treatment.

"I am writing this letter to tell you that this chemo is killing my body and I cannot take it anymore."

She left chemotherapy treatment while in remission to pursue alternative and traditional indigenous medicine.


The girl died Monday after suffering a stroke Sunday.

"Surrounded by the love and support of her family, her community and her nation … Makayla completed her course. She is now safely in the arms of Jesus," her family said in a statement published by the Two Row Times.

Although her family claims her death was due to chemotherapy, in September, a McMaster oncologist testified at a hearing on a similar case of a First Nations girl refusing cancer treatment that Makayla had suffered a relapse. The doctor also testified that there are no known cases of survival of this type of leukemia without a full course of chemotherapy treatment.


We have to draw a line somewhere.

We cannot let young children die as a result of their parent's iron age beliefs.


From what I gathered from the article it is my opinion that children services were reluctant to force the issue because of Native Rights. As you can see from the other article she wasn't the only one to recently die after withdrawing from treatment.

Basically the doctor said she had zero chance of survival without the full treatment and the parents went for a natural cure but no one checked to see what that natural remedy was or if it had ever seen a successful trial.

I definitely think child services should have at least looked into what type of treatment they went with but I doubt anyone will ever know now aside from the family.

Chemo sucks my father went through it and it did make life harsh for him but he recovered and I had another 10 years with him in my life before he passed from an unrelated cause.


I don't understand the part about Native rights nor do I understand the OP's reference to New Age and faith healers. They were Christians not New Agers and had no faith that she would be healed.




posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 01:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine




I thought her parents made the decision. If she made the decision for herself, it's her choice. After all, she was the one with the disease and she was the one suffering.


From what I understand the 11 year old had a dream that Jesus said she was healed and her parents said OK thats good enough.

Like I said I think this is sad.




I don't understand the part about Native rights nor do I understand the OP's reference to New Age and faith healers. They were Christians not New Agers and had no faith that she would be healed.




The children's aid society that handled Makayla's case, Brant Family and Children's Services, issued its own statement Tuesday.

"Makayla was a wonderful, loving child who eloquently exercised her indigenous rights as a First Nations person and those legal rights provided to her under Ontario's Health Care Consent Act," said executive director Andrew Koster.


Aboriginal Rights

You will have to ask the OP about his reference to new age faith healers out of the articles I have read on this they only said they were seeking alternative treatment I don't think children's aid society, Children's Services, or her doctors were ever told what the alternative treatment entailed.
edit on 23-1-2015 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 02:29 AM
link   
First of all, it's Ojibwe, not "Obijwa".

We aren't extinct.

And aboriginal? Hardly.

That said, she had a choice. She chose. I would choose the same.


edit on 23-1-2015 by WeAreAllTheSame because: Added an O to chose.



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 02:57 AM
link   
a reply to: WeAreAllTheSame

I am not sure who you are responding to with the ( Ojibwe, not "Obijwa") part but you mentioned aboriginal as though the word has been used incorrectly.

I suggest you click on the link and straighten them out at indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca... courtesy of The Univerity of British Colombia though I suspect the wording of "aboriginal" may either be a proper English, Canadian or scholarly phrasing for that univerity.



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 06:44 AM
link   
It's not as easy as some are making out in this thread. Yes chemotherapy is nasty business and I hope none of you do actually have to face the decision of whether to take it or not. I had my first chemo in 2003, then again in 2007 again in 2013 and due to take more in February. It clearly hasn't cured my tumour, but has kept me alive for 12 Good years. I didn't even think twice about taking it and I'm glad I took it. I have friends and relatives too, who are still alive thanks to chemotherapy. It's very hard to say what you would do when you haven't been diagnosed. I wonder what your reaction would be if the child had been diagnosed with Ebola and the parents were refusing a cure on religious grounds. Don't be caught up with the emotive terms of cancer and chemotherapy in drawing your conclusions here.



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 07:00 AM
link   
a reply to: muse7

Sorry if I missed it somewhere...but how is this a "big win"...for anybody ? Didn't the girl die ?



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 07:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: muse7
Her parents were obviously mentally ill but yet were allowed to make this decision for her?

Belief or faith is not mental illness. That's two different things.

Chemotherapy is the best thing we have right now to fight cancer, in this case this girl had a 75% chance of survival with Chemotherapy. The benefits obviously outweighed the side effects.

That's your opinion. Everyone should have a right to do whatever they want to their own bodies. If someone doesnt' want Chemo .. they have a right not to take it. THEIR CHOICE.


If I had cancer, I wouldn't do the chemo.

My sister-in-law had leukemia twice. She went through chemo hell for years. She now is alive but is a shadow of herself .. a shadow of who she used to be. And she gets seriously sick very easily ... catching pneumonia multiple times a year and lots of pain and brain fog.

Chemo? No thanks. Death isn't the worst thing in life. Sometimes it's better than living.



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 07:13 AM
link   
a reply to: muse7

To add a bit of balance to the doom and gloom comments.

My wife had breast cancer, an aggressive form and had the following treatments :

Surgery, twice.
Chemotherapy
Radiotherapy

She went through hell for a year, could hardly move. She still has problems with her nerves jangling BUT....No more breast cancer, the hair has grown back better than it was before and she has years ahead of her. She will be able to see her granddaughter grow up and her granddaughter will have a granny.

Whereas some of you lot would have had her throw in the towel.............



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 07:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
The decision shouldn't be in the hands of the children too young to make a reasonable opinion ...

When I was 11 I knew enough to decide if I would want chemo or not.
My body. My decision.



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 07:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: yorkshirelad
Whereas some of you lot would have had her throw in the towel.............

We'd say ... it's HER CHOICE and no one else's.
No one has the right to force chemo on anyone.
That's not telling people to 'throw in the towel'.
That's advocating 'the right to decide for themselves'.



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 07:25 AM
link   
a reply to: yorkshireladman if I'd have listened to the "collective wisdom" of ATS over the medical experts I'd have been dead by now.



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 08:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: yorkshirelad
Whereas some of you lot would have had her throw in the towel.............

We'd say ... it's HER CHOICE and no one else's.
No one has the right to force chemo on anyone.
That's not telling people to 'throw in the towel'.
That's advocating 'the right to decide for themselves'.



hey Flyers...not that I mind what you say...but am interested if you're consistent about it.

Judging by your comment I would think you endorse euthanasia...also...I suppose you support a woman's right to chose abortion ?



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 08:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
Judging by your comment I would think you endorse euthanasia...also...I suppose you support a woman's right to chose abortion ?


- I fully support physician assisted suicide for any adult who wants it .. anywhere ... at any time ... for any reason. Have you ever seen the movie 'Solyent Green'?? Remember the physician assisted suicide centers they had? That would be fantastic and I think they should be available worldwide.

Physician assisted suicide for non adults ... that's tricky. I'd support it for medical reasons for children who wanted it. I haven't yet formed a solid opinion on it for children.

- Abortion? I hate abortion. Women aren't aborting themselves, they are stopping another human beings heart from beating. And those children die painful deaths ... they are shredded to death or burned to death or their brains are destroyed (partial birth abortion). But the law says they can do it so that's where it is. If these women were killing themselves and not killing others, I'd not mind at all. The child who dies has no choice in the matter, so that muddies the water on this.

Bottom line - it's legal so they have the women right to do it.


edit on 1/23/2015 by FlyersFan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 08:49 AM
link   
a reply to: FlyersFan




Women aren't aborting themselves, they are stopping another human beings heart from beating.



well..I guess that's a matter of perspective. But let's not muddy the OP...


thanks for your response.



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 11:16 AM
link   
Your iogic is very flawed. Just because the parents did nothing doesn't mean chemotherapy is the right answer. They could have done something (And "something" doesn't include prayer, yes) and that something didn't have to be chemotherapy.
And just because they said the child could have been cured doesn't mean they are telling the truth. Or maybe It would have kileed the cancer. So what? Does that mean you can't be extremely sick without cancer? How do you think years of extreme poisoning would affect the body (Especially a young one)? Maybe they really just didn't want more suffering. Who sais this is a wrong decision?



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: yorkshirelad

Happy for you and her.


I would not take Chemo myself as my life is now. But I cannot say what I would do if I was your wife and had an granddaughter. Her life->her choice.



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 12:19 PM
link   
I know this isn't the same but my cat was diagnosed with cancer a year ago, and I was given the option of radiation or chemotherapy, with the understanding that it would be expensive and wouldn't guarantee survival. At best she could have lived a few more months, and it would have been the worst few months of her life, so I chose to try to make her as comfortable for her last days with pain killers, and other medicine and she was gone within 2 weeks of the diagnosis. I couldn't put her through that kind of torture just a squeeze a few extra months out of her life. In situations like that, who are you actually saving? It would have to be incredibly selfish to do something like that, IMO. You aren't saving the person or the pet, you are trying to hold on to them purely for yourself. Is it really worth living in agony because certain people believe it's better than death?

Now don't get me wrong here, there are situations when chemo or radiation actually does help cancer and cause it to go into remission. In those situations, it should be used, but I don't see a purpose when you are going to die regardless. I have nothing against holistic remedies and spiritual healers, but to just refuse treatment when it's your only hope and to sit back and think that you can pray the cancer away is ridiculous.
edit on 23-1-2015 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 03:55 PM
link   
I think every individual should have the freedom to put whatever they wish into their body, sick or not.

That being said, my mom took chemo for breast cancer when I was about 12 or 13. The tumor in her breast was the size of a grapefruit once the doctors finally admitted there was indeed a huge tumor in her breast. During the six months prior to her actual surgery and the beginning of chemo and radiation therapy, the doctors strung her along on antibiotics - yes, for six months. Regardless, with the surgery, chemo, radiation, a gallon of V-8 juice per day and a certain herbal medicine that shall remain nameless, she lived.

Four years and nine months later, the cancer had returned. The doctor told her to get her affairs in order and that she had two years to live, at best. She had already received her lifetime maximum of Adriamycin (a particular kind of chemo, also known as "red devil"), so they did even more surgery and gave her a different type of chemo which was still experimental at the time called Taxol. Again, she drank a gallon of V-8 juice every day and smoked like Bob Marley.

Twenty years later, she's still kicking ass and taking names


I will agree that chemo is poison - it made her so very ill at times. But she and I both believe whole-heartedly that it saved her life.

But she was an adult and taking the treatments offered to her was HER CHOICE. No one should ever be forced to put chemicals into their body. I think that must be one of the worst sorts of violating a human being that I can think of.

And we all know good and well that half the time, doctors are simply wrong wrong wrong. That's why they have to pay outrageous amounts of money for malpractice insurance. Every human being on the planet should have total freedom of choice when it comes to healthcare and their body.



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 04:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: muse7
Her parents were obviously mentally ill but yet were allowed to make this decision for her?

Belief or faith is not mental illness. That's two different things.
.


Excessive religiosity is listed in the DSM as one of the signs of several mental disorders.



posted on Jan, 23 2015 @ 05:51 PM
link   
I am looking at this a bit different than some others here. Some are debating the right to die and I don't see that as the issue in this case at all.

Based on the article the 11-year-old wasn't expecting to die nor was she asking for the right to die.

She had a dream. A dream that Jesus told her she was cured.

Some think an 11-year-old is mature enough to make life-critical decisions but how many think it is mature to make life decisions based on their dreams?

Now the parents went along with it for whatever reasons the article's don't really say. They do say during the course of Chemo the leukemia went into remission and later the family pursued some type of holistic medicine. A doctor is on record saying the leukemia came back and there are no known cases of people surviving that illness without the full course of chemo.

We also know she died of a stroke and that patients with leukemia are at a major risk of stroke from the illness. The parents claim the chemo is responsible for the stroke so I am wondering if they believe that enough to sue or if that is just something they are telling themselves because they don't want to imagine they made a bad choice and lost their daughter.

So I am thinking she probably didn't see Jesus in her dream because I don't think Jesus would lie which means it probably wasn't a good idea to base medical life-critical medical decisions off of a little 11-year old girls dreams.

Remember nothing in the article's say she chose to die.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join