Friday, March 28, 2008

As a parent can you legally refuse conventional cancer treatment for your kid

As a parent can you legally refuse conventional cancer treatment for your kid?
Chemotherapy/Radiation etc is nothing but poison to the body. When you poison the immune system and irradiate tissues, you create physical imbalances which in turn can create cancer. This is the simple reason why so many people who subject themselves to conventional cancer treatments find themselves battling recurring cancer. Conventional cancer treatments are downright brutal and destroy the immune system. I strongly believe in prevention and alternative medicine, and living a pure and natural lifestyle with raw organic foods, so my family and I will probably never ever get cancer. But if me or my kids or wife ever got cancer I swear I would never subject myself or them to that torture just to please the big pharma companies which don't give a sh*t about people. Just like I would never give them a bottle of rat poison to swallow. The big pharma companies only care about their trillion-dollar a year industry and keeping people brainwashed. My question is would a parent be legally allowed to refuse conventional cancer treatment if their kid got cancer? chemotherapy/radiation is the death wish. Big pharma is constantly throwing money out trying to make natural medicine of any kind illegal everywhere and denying the fact that it actually works! But of course everyone is too brainwashed to see that.
Parenting - 7 Answers


Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
I am so glad to read your views on this issue. I agree with you totally. I don't know about the laws on this in your country. I would hope that you can legally refuse, but laws are being changed all the time and lately, not in parents' favor, it seems. Do you subscribe to the newsletters from the site of Mike Adams, The Health Ranger? He has some information about this and a search topic bar. Maybe you can find your answer there.
2 :
In some states its considered a crime, but hopefully you never have to experience that. Just a little insight for you.......I have had experience with it with my then 10 year old son, he is now 31 years old. He had chemo, radiation and surgery........yes its a nightmare. But you should also know, there were babies on the floor (child oncology floor at the hospital, they all become your family) anyways these babies Mom's made there own baby food with organic veg's and fruit and only breastfed, one had a tumor on there foot and the other a tumor on the brain. We had a family who only ate whole foods, no fast food or premade foods her 7 year old had leukemia. There was family who came to the hospital from the midwest, they were organic farmers there little girl had a tumor behind the eye. There is so much more to this thing we call cancer that is unknown, more and more they are seeing stress as a factor. We were on the floor for 2 years and during that time we saw 5 deaths but countless survivors.
3 :
Some (if not most) cancers are inherited or at the very least you inherit the weak genes that allow cancer cells to proliferate. We ALL have cancer cells in our bodies whether we eat organic/whole foods or not. Prevention and alternative medicine is fine and dandy, but when it's your child who is in pain and facing a life threatening illness such as cancer, I would hope that you would want to do everything in your power to avoid shopping for a coffin. Hospitals have been known to get court orders to force treatment on minors when their parents have refused treatment and child endangerment and/or neglect charges should be filed on the parent refusing. A child can not advocate for him/herself, therefore it is your duty as a parent to make decisions based on the best possible outcome of the treatments presented to you. If one says your child lives (chemotherapy) and the other says your child dies (eating organic carrots), it should be a no-brainer which road you should follow. If, however, it's you that winds up with cancer then signing your death wish is your decision and yours alone to make.
4 :
I imagine that, at the very least, you'd have to be prepared to face your dying child and explain that you're going to let the cancer kill them because you'd rather them die by the cancer than be harmed by the chemotherapy and radiation. How are you going to explain that to your hypothetical terminally ill children? While I understand some of the basics behind your beliefs (not agree, but understand), what benefit lies in making sure your kids aren't exposed to the dangers of chemotherapy and radiation treatments if they're going to die from the cancer anyhow? Why not take the chance that comes with the chemo and radiation, even if that does create lasting issues for them rather than simply let the cancer overwhelm their bodies? I mean, bluntly and inconsiderately phrased, it seems stupid to reflect on it and say "yes, my child/wife died from cancer, but gosh dang it I didn't let them hurt their bodies with chemo and radiation!" Also, it might help if you can realize that the physical changes caused by conventional cancer treatments are only temporary. Yes, chemotherapy is very scary and very dangerous. Yes, it works by killing _every_ cell a body is trying to produce in hopes that the cancerous cells which multiply faster than normal cells will die off before the normal cells. Yes, chemotherapy takes one as close to death as possible with out actually killing them. Yes, it renders the immune system pretty much non-functional, but all of those things are only for the duration of the chemotherapy treatments. Once treatments stop, the body rebuilds and restrengthens. Radiation therapy only targets cells in a specific area and, again, stops once treatments stop.
5 :
Apparently you haven't read the papers or been listening to news in the last few years. This has come up many times. The parents will refuse treatment to their child, the state will bring them up on charges, and the children are often taken away due to neglectful parents. One case that occurred later this year involved a young boy with cancer. The parents refused cancer treatment and went to alternative means. He was getting worse. His doctor was able to prove that the boy's quality of life could be maintained and extended with cancer treatment. The courts took the child away for a time. He started treatment. He was rejoined with his parents and therapy continued through a court order. The boy is very healthy now with no sign of cancer. You are speaking from a very uneducated perspective. Even my naturopath would not agree with you. Cancer can be genetic...it can also be caused due to pollutants. Sometimes there is no reason. The most healthy people can get it. There just isn't a lot known about it. You can't guarantee your family will not get cancer. Both of my grandmothers and two aunts from separate sides of the family had breast cancer. The lived in rural areas, lived off the land, had never been to the doctor, had never been ill, didn't take medications. They all had different treatments and three survived. My aunt died because she was misdiagnosed by an overzealous doctor. By the time they diagnosed her correctly, the cancer was everywhere. She died a long and painful death. As for "big pharma"....to each their own. If you don't know how chemo or other therapies work or what they entail, then you shouldn't be talking about them. I have multiple sclerosis among a heart condition and two other illnesses. It took a while for me to be diagnosed correctly on all counts. Without medication, those two other illnesses and the heart ailment would have killed me. Frankly, I'm glad to be alive.
6 :
Yes. And at the same time, the state should take your child away for neglect and abuse. You're an idiot.
7 :
Well, I imagine you've read the other reponses and have your general answer. I think what you should be more concerned about is whether or not you can choose an alternative therapy. Non-treament would not be a solution. I know that personally I would like to try intravenous mega-doses of vitamin C or Gerson therapy, but those aren't effective against all cancers. I would prefer chemo, radiation and surgery to be last resorts, but never completely ruled out.



 Read more discussions :
Posted by at