Judge Forces Hysterectomy on God-Loving Woman

Originally posted by AxcidnKC
How can anyone side with the judge on this????

Because some of us actually read the article and then thought it through and realized that the judges decision was not based on the fact that she was religious, but because she was delusional, and her delusions happened to involve God.

MISSOULA, Mont. -- The Montana Supreme Court has delayed an order that a cancer patient undergo a hysterectomy to give her time to appeal a finding that she is not mentally competent to make such a decision.

District Judge Karen Townsend issued a March 1 ruling ordering the woman to undergo a radical hysterectomy on March 3 to treat her cervical cancer. The woman is identified in documents by the initials L.K.

L.K.'s appeal says she is a deeply religious woman who wants children and that she objected to the hysterectomy on both grounds, the Missoulian reported Sunday.

After L.K.'s cancer diagnosis, Dr. Valerie Knutsen sent a letter to the Missoula County attorney's office in September with concerns about L.K.'s ability to make medical decisions. A nurse sent similar letters in September and October. A petition to appoint a temporary medical guardian was filed in November. On Feb. 11, the temporary medical guardian signed a consent form for L.K. to have the radical hysterectomy. The surgery was scheduled for March 3.

And most relevantly:

The Supreme Court stayed Townsend's order and agreed to expedite the appeal.

A troubling court order to be sure - but, in this case, the system appears to be working. Let's hope all goes well for this woman.

~Heff
Source

That Montana Judge apparently never read the State's Constitution.

The Judge should lose their job and be held accountable.

reply to post by JewelFlip




I didn't know you could be forced into surgery, I thought we had a right to deny treatment.

reply to post by Pervius


Why dont you post the relevant portion of the states Constitution so that we know what you mean by that?

Originally posted by JewelFlip
thestir.cafemom.com...

A cancer patient in Montana -- identified only as L.K. -- refused to undergo a hysterectomy as treatment for her cancer on the grounds that she is deeply religious and wants to have children. That's sad enough in it's own right. But no one could have foreseen what happened next: A judge found her "mentally incompetent" based on her "delusional religious beliefs" and ruled she was to have the procedure.

(I wasn't too sure about the location on this one, if its in the wrong place feel free to move it - it just didn't feel like alternative news.)

it's her body...allow her to die. why would you have any government entity try and tell you what to do within your own body. besides, it's not religous freedom, it's personal freedom. of course the kids that she has now will not have a mother, and the husband will no longer have a wife if she dies.
besides, if she dies, her kids will obviously become so bitter towards the strict religous beliefs that she held, that they may escape from that christian dogma or at least temper that type of orthodoxy

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander


I think you have me a bit wrong. I am for a hysterectomy to treat cancer, she could always adopt. BUT by forcing her, her rights are being violated. It ought to pass along to her next of kin. You can't force treatment on someone, that's what I think is wrong with this. Yes, her doctors believe she is delusional and if I knew her I may agree, but how does that give them the right to remove her organs. The second quote in my last reply to you said in the end that this is unconstitutional.

“ ... under the Montana Constitution her dignity is inviolable, including when her life or health is potentially at risk.”

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander

BUT the article indicates that she falsely believed herself to be cured. Which indicates delusional thinking,

I don't see the difference, many people believe just the fact one believes in god makes you delusional.

A slippery slope indeed.

We're talking personal and religious freedom - versus - Eugenics Policies. And it's not like there's any emergency here! The medicos say she'll die in 3 years. Three years?! ...That's a lifetime for cancer patients.

I think we need to remember that there is a difference between :

"My religious beliefs forbid me to do this"

and

"god told me that I'm cured and doesn't want me to do this"

There's a fine line between religious belief and mental illness... When people believe in "god" it's religion, when "god" starts talking to people and telling them what to do, it's mental illness...

Trust me, I have seen my fair share of mental illness in my career... When you speak to "god", he has started speaking back to you, it's time to see a Doctor...

Magnum

P.S. My grandfather was also a "deeply religious man"... In the last few months of his life, he saw "jesus" in everything that was liquid and would talk to him (including the toilet, glass of water, soup, etc...) Does this make him a deeply religious person or a person who could not make an informed decision on his well being? Well the court that my family had to take him to (he refused to take his meds), agreed that he was not capable of making an informed decision... Especially after he testified that "god" was everywhere and saw "everything"...

reply to post by Magnum007


I have seen miracles,



When the doctor said my daughters body was no longer compatible for sustaining human life and I prayed over her incessantly for two days,

When the doctor told me this I asked , then why is she still alive, the doctor walked away, and my daughter survived.

Yes, I have witnessed many miracles.

reply to post by Stormdancer777


I know you guys dont see the difference. But there is one.

Imagine that someone slips you a hallucinogen. A really really strong one. And while you are on the hallucinogen, you are hit by a car. You need immediate surgery to save your life, but you are still under the effects of the hallucinogen and you, believing the doctors to be demons, scream at them to leave you alone.

Should they ignore the fact that you are out of your mind and delusional and respect your wishes to leave you alone?

Or should they recognize that you are mentally impaired, and save your life?

Our system in general recognizes that there is a need to intervene medically for people who cannot give consent, either because they are insane, on drugs, or even unconscious. If we did not do that, imagine how many people would die while everyone stood around waiting for them to regain consciousness and give consent.

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander


I read the article. I still side with the person. This is my body, I should be able to do what i want with it. I don't think that someone else has the right to say oh he is not in his right mind, we will decide for him. Where do you draw the line. A lot of people would say you post on a conspiracy website, your not in your right mind. bottom line, it's her body, her choice.

There's a price to freedom -it's not always paid by the solider on the battlefield.

There's a new religion called science now, and it's PROVEN and the majority know it to be REAL and VERIFIED.
Don't you dare disagree with it.

Originally posted by Pervius
That Montana Judge apparently never read the State's Constitution.

The Judge should lose their job and be held accountable.

so let me get this striaght..........

a women chooses to not remove cancer inside her own body and let herself die, ok

a women chooses to abort a fetus inside her own body so she doesn't die... not ok

can't have it both ways, unless you like seeing women die.

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander


I edited my post above yours,

Was the women declared insane by this judge?

reply to post by Stormdancer777


You should consider reading the more detailed article Hefficide linked to.

www.washingtonpost.com...

After L.K.'s cancer diagnosis, Dr. Valerie Knutsen sent a letter to the Missoula County attorney's office in September with concerns about L.K.'s ability to make medical decisions. A nurse sent similar letters in September and October. A petition to appoint a temporary medical guardian was filed in November. On Feb. 11, the temporary medical guardian signed a consent form for L.K. to have the radical hysterectomy.

Also note, like Hefficide said, the surgery is being delayed to give her time to appeal, which indicates the system is working as intended.

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander


Another part of it that people are refusing to acknowledge is that of consent.

Legally, if you are insane or delusional, you cannot consent to all kinds of things. You cant form contracts, you cant agree to sex, you cant sign your property away, a lot of stuff. You cant if you are out of you mind on drugs or alcohol, or if you are out of you mind via mental illness or injury.

She, by believing something science can demonstrate is not true, (that her cancer is gone, when it is not) is not making a choice. She is suffering from a delusion. If she knew the cancer was still there, and she just didnt want the surgery, it should be her choice. But if she is out of her mind, no one is driving. No one is at the wheel making decisions, legally speaking, and therefore someone has to step up and take that responsibility.

BY your definition any adult that refuses any life extending treatment could be considered delusional
since they are committing suicide and therefore should be forced to have it. Dialysis,bypass,transplant operations,transfusions,etc.
The government does have a right to protect delusional people from exploitation from others.
People have a right to die. People have a right to refuse medical treatment.
If you take that right away they are just cattle.
Delusional people have a right to refuse any treatment and to kill themselves if they want to.
ITS CALLED FREEDOM.

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
reply to post by Stormdancer777

 

You should consider reading the more detailed article Hefficide linked to.

www.washingtonpost.com...

After L.K.'s cancer diagnosis, Dr. Valerie Knutsen sent a letter to the Missoula County attorney's office in September with concerns about L.K.'s ability to make medical decisions. A nurse sent similar letters in September and October. A petition to appoint a temporary medical guardian was filed in November. On Feb. 11, the temporary medical guardian signed a consent form for L.K. to have the radical hysterectomy.

Also note, like Hefficide said, the surgery is being delayed to give her time to appeal, which indicates the system is working as intended.

Your delusional.
You need immediate treatment.

Originally posted by RRokkyy

BY your definition any adult that refuses any life extending treatment could be considered delusional
since they are committing suicide and therefore should be forced to have it. Dialysis,bypass,transplant operations,transfusions,etc.

No. By that definition any adult who refuses life extending treatment is not considered delusional. People can and do, all the time, refuse treatment, or end treatment that isnt working as hoped.

Originally posted by RRokkyy

Your delusional.
You need immediate treatment.

And you are off topic and attacking personally without any real contribution to the thread, and writing it in lime green doesnt make it true, or on topic.