Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Religion

Warpy

(111,124 posts)

27. I think they should have listened to their son

Reply to trotsky (Reply #14)

Thu Jun 12, 2014, 04:24 PM

Jun 2014

and had a very frank discussion with the doctors with the kid included about what another round of chemo could and could not do.

The good Rebbe was talking through his yarmulke.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

33 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Court Forces Family To Give Teen Chemotherapy Against Rabbi's Advice [View all] cleanhippie Jun 2014 OP

Thank Koresh there was a system in place to get the boy the care he needed. n/t trotsky Jun 2014 #1

sounds more like practicing medicine without a license than religious ignorance. unblock Jun 2014 #2

Sounds like both. Iggo Jun 2014 #11

"The boy said his previous treatments were very painful and that he preferred to 'go home and die'” rug Jun 2014 #3

"The court stated that the boy had not been received from his parents accurate information..." cleanhippie Jun 2014 #4

He had information on the pain of the treatment. rug Jun 2014 #5

But not on the efficacy. cleanhippie Jun 2014 #10

No, absolutely not, but if he were four years older, I would do so. Donald Ian Rankin Jun 2014 #6

Do you know what age prevails in Israel to make personal medical decisions? rug Jun 2014 #7

I don't have a clue, but if it's as young as 14, it shouldn't be. N.T. Donald Ian Rankin Jun 2014 #8

Oh definitely edhopper Jun 2014 #15

Sometimes it's better than the treatment. rug Jun 2014 #16

The boy didn't HAVE all the info to make that decision. cleanhippie Jun 2014 #19

That wasn't the question. You can be 80 and not have the info. rug Jun 2014 #20

No one can make an informed decision if they have info intentionally withheld. cleanhippie Jun 2014 #21

So, if he were 7 it would be irrelevant? rug Jun 2014 #22

He's not 7, so your question is also irrelevant. cleanhippie Jun 2014 #23

No, he's 14. Now you can answer the question. rug Jun 2014 #25

Your question is irrelevant. He didn't have all the info in order to make one. cleanhippie Jun 2014 #26

Deflect, duck, weasel, rinse, repeat. rug Jun 2014 #28

Great self-evaluation. cleanhippie Jun 2014 #29

In this instance edhopper Jun 2014 #24

Here's the Israeli statute on consent. rug Jun 2014 #17

a friend of mine is a cancer survivor. okasha Jun 2014 #9

So you agree that as a patient, he was intentionally uninformed? cleanhippie Jun 2014 #12

Do you think the family should have listened to the rabbi, and stopped treatment? n/t trotsky Jun 2014 #14

I think they should have listened to their son Warpy Jun 2014 #27

But that's the problem, they didn't want to listen to him. They wanted him to do what they believed cleanhippie Jun 2014 #30

" The boy said his previous treatments were very painful and that he preferred to “go home and die.” Warpy Jun 2014 #31

"The court stated that the boy had not been received from his parents accurate information..." cleanhippie Jun 2014 #33

Cancer is a cellular condition Act_of_Reparation Jun 2014 #18

My friend was fully informed of his options okasha Jun 2014 #32

That Rabbi was practicing medicine without a license, he belongs in jail. Humanist_Activist Jun 2014 #13