It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Imagine for a moment your nine-year-old son is diagnosed with a rare form of cancer, suffers through nearly three months of chemotherapy, is scanned, and declared cancer free. Then imagine that your state takes you to court to force your cancer-free son to have even more chemotherapy and also radiation treatments, at the behest of your son’s doctor.
A malignant tumor, Ewing sarcoma, was discovered on his spine, and surgery was successful in removing the bulk of it. The small amount left behind was successfully treated with chemotherapy. Although a positron emission tomography (PET) scan showed that all the cancer surgically removed did not grow back, Jacob’s oncologist insisted he go through another six months of chemotherapy and an additional two months of radiation. His diagnosis was based solely on an insurance company-influenced “standard of care” protocol, which costs $60,000 a month.
Immediately following Jacob’s treatment, the Stielers were contacted by an investigator from Michigan’s Department of Human Services (DHS), a 10,000-employee state agency with a $4 billion budget that provides public assistance and child and family welfare services. She asked if he was ready for round two.
Mrs. Stieler informed her they had decided to decline further treatments, as the PET scans had shown Jacob was cancer free. At that point, the DHS representative said she had no choice but to petition the court and force them to comply with the doctors’ and hospital’s recommendation.
Let see……..I never got back to you all after the motions hearing on November 30th. I guess I didn’t take the time because there was nothing to report. They were supposed to go over some of the motions that were filed, but the “other side” wasn’t prepared. It ‘s getting quite ridiculous! They’ve been investigating us since July. Filed the petition in September and THEY’RE not ready? Oh, and I forgot to mention that one of the reasons that the trial was asked to be moved to January is because “it’s not fair” that it was 2 against 1. As in Ken and I having 2 lawyers to their one. Pathetic! Oh well! I guess this all just makes them look worse and worse.
Originally posted by LightSpeedDriver
reply to post by jude11
In my mind this just adds to the conspiracy of registering (regis, Latin for "to rule") a child's birth. In effect one appears to give control to the government. It's sick and nasty and anyone that forces another person to undergo compulsory medical treatment is a sick, bigoted a-hat.