MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus on Twitter · Facebook · Flickr · Newsletters · Instagram 
james madison beach
Saturday, August 23, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 77.0° F  Fog/Mist
Collapse Photo Bar

A very disturbing story

If it's news, but not politics, then it goes here.

Re: A very disturbing story

Postby Chuck_Schick » Thu May 28, 2009 8:35 am

The point is, though, as barbaric as it may be or how future generations may be shocked by it, chemo is the best chance for allowing a normal span of life for patients with this particular type of disease at this juncture in human history.

I just love the "it's barbaric" non-argument. You know what was barbaric? Pulling someone's molars in the days before anesthesia. You know what else sucked? Dying of an abscessed tooth.

Peanutbutter wrote:
My final point is that in my opinion, a 13 year old should not be allowed to make life and death decisions for him or herself. The prefrontal cortex of the brain, the decision-making center, is among the last of the brain's areas to completely develop, finishing around age twenty five.


I agree. Which is why parental consent should be required if a child wants an abortion.

Nice hijack. Whether or not to have an abortion isn't a life or death decision.

And how about the 13-year-old girl who knows full well that her father is going to beat the holy living shit out of her if he finds out she's been sexually active (let alone knocked up)? Any pity for her? Or does this scenario never present itself in your narrow black & white world?
Chuck_Schick
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 10385
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2001 4:41 pm
Location: back atcha

Re: A very disturbing story

Postby Peanutbutter » Thu May 28, 2009 8:51 am

Chuck_Schick wrote:Whether or not to have an abortion isn't a life or death decision.


You sure about that?

http://realchoice.0catch.com/library/de ... deaths.htm

And how about the 13-year-old girl who knows full well that her father is going to beat the holy living shit out of her if he finds out she's been sexually active (let alone knocked up)? Any pity for her?


I have as much pity for her as you have for the kid being forced by a judge to undergo a dangerous and painful medical procedure that may cause more harm than good.
Peanutbutter
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 953
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 11:54 am

Re: A very disturbing story

Postby TAsunder » Thu May 28, 2009 8:57 am

Violet_Skye wrote:I think she explained it pretty well. 1) Hodgkins is a lymphoma, which she stated falls in the sarcoma category, which she explained is notoriously hard to treat.


Sarcoma is a wide category. We know it is a hodgkins lymphoma. Hodgkins is very, very treatable. It is one of the most treatable of all cancers. Thus my confusion over that part (the main thing I found confusing). Even late stage, it is quite treatable.

2) Interrupting the chemotherapy regimen prescribed for the child has probably considerably lessened his chances of successful chemo in the future, a scenario she also described.


Probably so, but I imagine his chances are still much, much greater than someone with a much more nasty cancer. Anyway I wasn't confused by that part of her statement, just the part about not knowing what type of lymphoma it was, etc.
TAsunder
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4781
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:21 pm
Location: Near East Side, Madison

Re: A very disturbing story

Postby Chuck_Schick » Thu May 28, 2009 9:12 am

Peanutbutter wrote:
Chuck_Schick wrote:Whether or not to have an abortion isn't a life or death decision.


You sure about that?

http://realchoice.0catch.com/library/de ... deaths.htm

Oh that horseshit site is fucking priceless. Thanks for sharing.

Really? Padding your statistics with women who died of complications as far back as fucking 1858? REALLY?!

Then there's this gem:

The stories below tell about women who died from abortions. The stories come from court documents, medical journal articles, autopsy reports, news stories, and online sources. The dates range from the 19th century to the 21st century. The abortionists were mostly doctors, though a few were lay abortionists, some were posing as physicians, and a few were the woman herself.

Oh, I see. So you're also including illegal procedures and back alley abortions in your meaningless stats? What the fuck side are these fucking morons on, anyway? Yeah, I always include anecdotes that undermine my thesis when I'm making a case for or against something. It's the first thing they teach you in debate class.

Color me all turned around on the issue.

Big ol' whiff there, Slugger. But thanks for the morning guffaw.
Chuck_Schick
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 10385
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2001 4:41 pm
Location: back atcha

Re: A very disturbing story

Postby GODDOG » Thu May 28, 2009 9:29 am

I choose this link as not to be seen as a "liberal".
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,521889,00.html
The case is closed. Ma and Pa "kid killer" have returned to MN and are following the court order.
Mother Dear is still trying to plea to the court about alt. treatments but IS following the law.
Can I now get court orders to force diabetes treatments on kids whose parents are killing their kids Twinkie by Twinkie?
Can I get my neighbors fat ass kids into treatment for obesity because their fat ass parents are killing them?
Is that not child abuse when parents feed their little porkers cream puff after cream puff at the state fair? Or is your moral outrage confined to cancer treatments?
Cheers to Snoqueen, for laying out my argument in a better show of articulation.
GODDOG
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 477
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008 9:26 pm
Location: Earth

Re: A very disturbing story

Postby TAsunder » Thu May 28, 2009 9:37 am

Twinkies don't cause diabetes.
TAsunder
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4781
Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:21 pm
Location: Near East Side, Madison

Re: A very disturbing story

Postby GODDOG » Thu May 28, 2009 9:40 am

TAsunder wrote:Twinkies don't cause diabetes.


technically correct. I was referencing the obesity that can come from over consumption of such shit foods, that "can" lead to type II diabetes. Can you say for certain they don't?
here's a good link if you really care.
http://www.diabetesmellitus-information ... causes.htm
and nice job of picking out the one bone of contention and not answering the more pertinent question. Can we now force other medical treatments on kids we feel are going to die? Fat kills more than cigs.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/articl ... tml?cat=51
GODDOG
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 477
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008 9:26 pm
Location: Earth

Re: A very disturbing story

Postby Henry Vilas » Thu May 28, 2009 10:25 am

Reductio ad absurdum
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 19732
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Re: A very disturbing story

Postby GODDOG » Thu May 28, 2009 10:55 am

argumentum a fortiori
GODDOG
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 477
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008 9:26 pm
Location: Earth

Re: A very disturbing story

Postby bitcharista » Thu May 28, 2009 12:38 pm

I watched my 56 yr old father die a brutal two year death of chemo and radiation. Just like a previous poster said, chemo just pissed the cancer off and came back with a vengence.

He was told his tumor would eventually suffucate him in his sleep. A hell of a lot better way to die. Exponentially better.

Jack Klugman got the same cancer the same year as my father. He opted out of chemo. He's still alive, in his 80s remarried to a much younger wife....

I just got word a good friend of mine succumbed to her cancer after a year of hellish chemo. Funeral this saturday.

Cancer treatment choices are a personal right. This includes parents.

There is no such thing as a "proven" treatment cure for any cancer.

If you have your death in front of you, do you want the government to decide for you how it's going to happen?

No thanks. I'd rather trust my loved ones.
bitcharista
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 204
Joined: Thu Apr 09, 2009 10:13 am

Re: A very disturbing story

Postby Violet_Skye » Thu May 28, 2009 12:55 pm

Different cancers respond differently to treatment. Hodgkins is one that responds well to chemotherapy, having an over 90% remission rate. Untreated, survival rate is about 5%. Doesn't this figure into the decision?
Violet_Skye
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1297
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 10:33 am
Location: Northeast side

Re: A very disturbing story

Postby Ned Flounders » Thu May 28, 2009 1:10 pm

As has been mentioned many times in this thread, it's difficult to generalize about cancer.

In this case (Hodgkin's lymphoma), the cancer is almost always treatable. From the website of the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society (and many other sources seem to agree with this):

Hodgkin lymphoma is now considered to be one of the most curable forms of cancer. Many patients with Hodgkin lymphoma are cured after initial treatment. For the smaller number of patients who may have a recurrence of the disease or a relapse, re-treatment with chemotherapy is often successful. [...]

Five-year relative survival is 95.3 percent for Hodgkin lymphoma in people under 20.


I'm having trouble finding good information about survival rates when left untreated, but they seem to be in the 10% range (?) or less.

In other words, refusing to seek treatment for this is tantamount to suicide. I'm absolutely flabbergasted that people would have no problem with letting a 13-year-old boy die like this, particularly when due to his learning disability and his parents' influence (homeschooling, etc.) he seems to have no understanding of the medical reality of his situation.

If a parent lets their children play "Russian Roulette" with a loaded handgun, or physically abuses them, or engages in other obviously dangerous behavior towards their children, most of us have no problem with the idea of the community stepping in and stopping this abuse/neglect.

Why are some people OK with the idea of deliberately withholding necessary medical care from a child whose illness is (a) highly curable, and (b) deadly if left untreated?

----------
Edit: Oops, looks like VS beat me to it on the survival rates....
Ned Flounders
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 707
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 3:32 pm

Re: A very disturbing story

Postby Chuck_Schick » Thu May 28, 2009 1:16 pm

Violet_Skye wrote:Different cancers respond differently to treatment. Hodgkins is one that responds well to chemotherapy, having an over 90% remission rate. Untreated, survival rate is about 5%. Doesn't this figure into the decision?

Amscray with the actsfay there, Skye. Apparently all cancers are the same. There are no variables at work here and I'm sure the judge in this case just flipped a flippin' coin to decide it.

It's torture pure and simple. Much like this fucking thread.
Chuck_Schick
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 10385
Joined: Fri Nov 16, 2001 4:41 pm
Location: back atcha

Re: A very disturbing story

Postby GODDOG » Thu May 28, 2009 1:21 pm

Ned Flounders wrote:If a parent lets their children play "Russian Roulette" with a loaded handgun, or physically abuses them, or engages in other obviously dangerous behavior towards their children, most of us have no problem with the idea of the community stepping in and stopping this abuse/neglect.

Why are some people OK with the idea of deliberately withholding necessary medical care from a child whose illness is (a) highly curable, and (b) deadly if left untreated?

----------
Edit: Oops, looks like VS beat me to it on the survival rates....

I agree w/ you Flounders....let's start locking up fat ass parents and start treating their fat ass kids. Let's step in and protect these kids before their hearts explode or more than likely develop diabetes! We've cut P.E. in our schools as well as Art and Music classes and we wonder why kids are so damn fat and lazy. Their parents are killing them one sugar filled soda and I'll say it again, one Twinkie at a time!
GODDOG
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 477
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2008 9:26 pm
Location: Earth

Re: A very disturbing story

Postby Ned Flounders » Thu May 28, 2009 2:01 pm

snoqueen wrote:Given that we will all die, I believe it is a fundamental human right to make choices that make a person's death for a particular reason more likely. This includes silly stuff like smoking, alcohol, and overeating, but it also includes serious stuff like declining medical treatment for oneself and one's loved ones. People don't make these choices lightly, even dippy people.

This is not child abuse, it is a family with perfectly serious personal beliefs that are way out of the mainstream. Let's not confuse REAL child abuse (the Irish story) with the issue of this poor weird family who prefer to lose their son instead of putting him through a hideous procedure that in a hundred years will shock readers the same way arsenic cures and bloodletting horrify us today.


I obviously don't agree (see previous comment). There are many ways to abuse somebody, both direct (beating, sexual abuse) and less direct (withholding food, withholding medical treatment, solitary confinement, etc.)

This obviously doesn't mean reporting somebody to social services just because they let their children eat junk food. Goddog's reductio ad absurdam to the contrary, I'm generally inclined to look the other way when parents do things that I don't necessarily approve of. The only time I think the community needs to step in is when there is a high likelihood that a child will suffer predictable and dire negative consequences (e.g., injury, death, or extreme mental trauma) unless something is done immediately.

Contra snoqueen, to me the fact that people "don't make these choices lightly" is irrelevant. I'm not primarily concerned about the subjective thought process of the parent, I'm concerned about the objective survival (or not) of the child. I suppose on some level you could argue that parents who agonize long and hard over a situation and then come to the wrong decision are "better" people than those who blindly follow the doctor's advice without a second (or even first) thought. But that admirable seriousness of mind doesn't really compensate for the preventable death of a young person.

I also disagree strongly with snoqueen's final statement in the excerpt above. What is "hideous" or "shocking" about premodern medical care is not that it was gory or relied on the use of toxic metals; it's that it was gory and ineffective. A hundred years from now, our great-grandchildren may have much better ways to treat cancer, but if so, it will be specifically because of the success of evidence-based medicine. Sure, there's a lot that we still don't know, and sure, much of modern medicine will look primitive in the future. But that's no reason to throw out the things we do know! And from all accounts, the form of cancer that young Mr Hauser is suffering from is very likely to be curable with our present-day medical care.
Last edited by Ned Flounders on Thu May 28, 2009 3:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Ned Flounders
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 707
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 3:32 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Headlines

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


commentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar