Minn. Judge Rules Teen Must See Cancer Doctor

rockin'robin

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
24,433
Reaction score
544
MINNEAPOLIS – A Minnesota couple who refused chemotherapy for their 13-year-old son was ordered Friday to have the boy re-evaluated to see if he would still benefit from the cancer treatment — or if it may already be too late.

Brown County District Judge John Rodenberg found Daniel Hauser has been "medically neglected" by his parents, Colleen and Anthony Hauser, who belong to a religious group that believes in using only natural healing methods practiced by some American Indians.

The judge allowed Daniel to stay with his parents, noting they love him and acted in good faith, but he gave them until Tuesday to get an updated chest X-ray and select an oncologist.

If the tumor has not grown and if Daniel's prognosis remains as optimistic as doctors testified last week, then chemotherapy and possible radiation appear to be in Daniel's best interest, Rodenberg wrote.

"The state has successfully shown by clear and convincing evidence that continued chemotherapy is medically necessary," he wrote, adding he would not order chemotherapy if doctors find the cancer has advanced to a point where it is "too late."

If chemotherapy is ordered and the family refuses, the judge said, Daniel will be placed in temporary custody.

It was unclear how the medicine would be administered if the boy fights it, which he said he would do, according to his court testimony unsealed Friday.

According to Daniel's court testimony, he believes the chemo will kill him, and said: "I'd fight it. I'd punch them and I'd kick them."

Calvin Johnson, an attorney for Daniel's parents, said the family is considering an appeal. For now, he said, Daniel is following the order and will have X-rays Monday.

Dr. Bruce Bostrom, a pediatric oncologist at Children's Hospitals and Clinics of Minnesota, diagnosed Daniel with Hodgkin's lymphoma in January and recommended six rounds of chemotherapy.

He underwent one round in February, but stopped after that single treatment. He and his parents opted instead for "alternative medicines," citing religious beliefs.

Doctors have said Daniel's cancer had a 90 percent chance of being cured with chemotherapy and radiation. Without those treatments, doctors said his chances of survival are 5 percent. Child protection workers accused Daniel's parents of medical neglect, and went to court seeking custody.

Court testimony indicated Daniel's tumor shrank after the first round of chemo, but has since grown. His mother, Colleen Hauser, testified last week: "My son is not in any medical danger at this point."

She has been treating his cancer with herbal supplements, vitamins, ionized water, and other natural alternatives — despite testimony from five doctors who agreed Daniel needed chemotherapy.

Rodenberg wrote that state statutes require parents to provide necessary medical care for a child. The statutes say alternative and complementary health care methods aren't enough.

"If the Minnesota Legislature ever reconsiders the relevant statutes, I am confident that I join all of the others involved in this matter in hoping, and indeed in praying, that Daniel Hauser lives to testify at that hearing," Rodenberg said.

Rodenberg found Daniel has only a "rudimentary understanding at best of the risks and benefits of chemotherapy. ... he does not believe he is ill currently. The fact is that he is very ill currently."

Because of that, and other evidence in the case, Rodenberg said the state's interest in protecting the child override the constitutional right to freedom of
religious expression and a parent's right to direct a child's upbringing.

Medical neglect, Rodenberg said, clearly took place both on April 29, when the Hausers did not seek the advice of one doctor who told them to return to an oncologist, and on May 7, when they disregarded with their family doctor's recommendation to get the tumor X-rayed. Up until then, Rodenberg wrote, the family was seeking second opinions and alternatives.

A court-appointed attorney for Daniel, Philip Elbert, called the judge's decision unfortunate.

"I feel it's a blow to families," he said Friday. "It marginalizes the decisions that parents face every day in regard to their children's medical care. It really affirms the role that big government is better at making our decisions for us."

The phone line at the Hauser home had a busy signal Friday.

Johnson, the parents' attorney, said everyone should be able to get medical care in line with their conscience.

"The Hausers believe that the injection of chemotherapy into Danny Hauser amounts to an assault upon his body, and torture when it occurs over a long period of time," Johnson said Friday. "They believe that it is against the spiritual law to invade the consciousness of another person without their permission."

The Hausers, who have eight children, are Roman Catholic and also believe in the "do no harm" philosophy of the Nemenhah Band. The Missouri-based religious group believes in natural healing methods advocated by some American Indians.

In his ruling, Rodenberg noted that at age 13, Daniel can't read. "He lacks the ability to give informed consent to medical procedures," Rodenberg said.

Bostrom said if an X-ray shows that there is still hope Daniel can be cured, it's possible doctors will recommend the same treatment plan.

Fear of chemotherapy is common among his patients, and Children's Hospital has a program that incorporates herbal supplements, massage, acupuncture, and other alternative methods to help patients deal with the side effects of the medication. It's unclear where Daniel will seek treatment

"The bottom line is we just want to get through this, have him get better," Bostrom said. "And I'm happy the judge ruled that he could stay with his family because they are wonderful people ... We want what's best for Danny."

Minn. judge rules teen must see cancer doctor
 
I firmly believe that people have the right to religion and the right to choose which religion to believe in. We have freedom of choice. However, I do not fully believe that religion should interfere with medical needs, particularly if it's a parent making that decision for the child. A child is not old enough to understand the consequences of his/her actions if they choose to reject particular medical treatment, and know only what their parents have informed them. This particular child did not choose his religion, and could die if he doesn't get the treatment. The parents would rather see their child die than use proper medical technology? Very wrong indeed.
 
updates:

Minn. judge rules teen must see cancer doctor
kare11.com | Twin Cities, MN | Minn. judge rules teen must see cancer doctor

NEW ULM, Minn.-- A Minnesota judge ruled Friday that a family cannot refuse chemotherapy for their cancer stricken 13 year old son.

Judge John Rodenberg denied the Hauser family's request to decline chemo for their son Daniel. The family wanted to avoid chemotherapy, citing their religious beliefs.

In his ruling, Judge Rodenberg wrote:

"Brown County Family services has demonstrated a compelling state interest in the life and welfare of Daniel Hauser sufficient to override the fundamental constitutional rights of both parents and Daniel to the free exercise of religion and the due process right of the parents to direct the religious and other upbringing of the child."

His cancer doctor says Daniel Hauser of Sleepy Eye has a 90 percent chance of surviving his Hodgkin's lymphoma with chemotherapy. Without it, Dr. Bruce Bostrom says, it's almost certain Daniel will die.

Nevertheless, Colleen and Anthony Hauser are supporting what they say is their son's decision to instead treat the disease with nutritional supplements and other alternative treatments. They belong to the Nemenhah Band, a Missouri-based religious group that believes in natural healing methods.

Judge Rodenberg praised all parties, including the family and county officials, for acting in good faith at all times.

The judge said doctors at Children's Hospital, the Mayo Clinic, and the University of Minnesota, all agreed that Daniel would respond well to chemo.

Without chemo, the doctors say Daniel likely would not survive another five years.

The judge called the evidence "uncontroverted" that the best treatment for Daniel's cancer involves chemotherapy.

The judge called the family's belief in holistic medicine, particularly Nemenah, a Native American healing practice, as "genuine and strong."

But despite their rights to believe as they wish, the judge said several Minnesota statutes require parents to provide "necessary medical care" to their children, and that "complementary and alternative health care" is not enough.

The judge also said Daniel should remain with his family, as long as the medical care is provided.

Friday afternoon, the family held a news conference at their farm. They did not make a statement, but the family lawyer, Calvin Johnson, did.

"The Hauser's believe that the injection of chemotherapy into Danny Hauser amounts to an assault upon his body, and torture when it occurs over a long period of time," Johnson said.

"They believe that it is against the spiritual law to invade the consciousness of another person without their permission," he said.

Johnson added that the family is "presently" abiding by the court order, and making an appointment to see his doctor.

But, Johnson says, Daniel still plans to refuse to undergo chemotherapy treatment. The family believes that would be a form of assault that the courts cannot sanction.

Another court hearing is set for Tuesday for the family to show it's complying with the judge's order.
 
They cant depend on God to do EVERYTHING especially on people who are very sick and is in desperate need of medical attention.

Why do you think God created doctors for a reason?

It's all part of the human experience.
 
It supposed to be up to teenagers, however there's common sense about they are required to have treatment, despite over religious problem.

If this man were adult then it would be his decision to receive a treatment or death.

If cancer don't treated so early then it would become more harder to fight it and alot of medical cost, additional with funeral cost too.
 
Every child once out of womans womb has a fundamental right to live and in this case the child has 90% of surviving if treated and 5% of survivng without treatment. Since the court feels it's in the best interest of the child to live, it is fair to override parental objections that could lead to death.
 
I stand behind the boy. However, I do have concerns about his inability to read.

With that said, I believe that the judge has pissed on the Constitution by violating the boy's First Amendment rights.
 
I stand behind the boy. However, I do have concerns about his inability to read.

With that said, I believe that the judge has pissed on the Constitution by violating the boy's First Amendment rights.

The boy is a minor. He doesn't have any constitutional rights.

But this is an interesting stance you are taking, given your right to life stance in other areas.
 
The boy is a minor. He doesn't have any constitutional rights.

But this is an interesting stance you are taking, given your right to life stance in other areas.
Are you saying that no minor American children have any Constitutional rights?
 
Are you saying that no minor American children have any Constitutional rights?

Did you see somewhere where I said that? Because I really wish you would direct me to that specific post. I don't recall saying anything of the kind.
 
I mean exactly what I said. In the case of deciding his medical treatment, he has no constitutional rights.

I can disagree with the parents's refusing treatment but I'm afraid I can't do anything as it's his parents who have a right to chose or refuse treatment of their child on religious grounds. Personally, I think it borders on neglect for the child's welfare.
 
I am absolutely bothered by cases like this. On the one hand, I think teenagers should have a voice in deciding what should is done to them, but that doesn't supercede a parent's responsiblity to care for that child/teenager needs.

I'm torn beyond belief here. I really am. I just hope and pray that whatever comes of this, the right decisions are made for the child.
 
This is like being in between a rock and a hard place.

I can understand why the religion freedom is part of being a freedom in this country but on the other hand, is it wrong to go that far to deny the medical needs of that boy?

Granted, He's a minor but at the same time, Shouldn't he be aware of what he wants and needs? Perhaps but since he is not able to read, that is making the situation a bit complicated.

Obviously, The parents loves this child but with being in the part of it's religion upbringing - I am a bit baffled because even if it was part of the religion upbringing, I would even do ANYthing to give my child a life even if it goes against my religion. Just saying.
 
I can disagree with the parents's refusing treatment but I'm afraid I can't do anything as it's his parents who have a right to chose or refuse treatment of their child on religious grounds. Personally, I think it borders on neglect for the child's welfare.

I agree with you. This would easily fall under the heading of "Medical Neglect" and/or "Child Endangerment."
 
This is like being in between a rock and a hard place.

I can understand why the religion freedom is part of being a freedom in this country but on the other hand, is it wrong to go that far to deny the medical needs of that boy?

Granted, He's a minor but at the same time, Shouldn't he be aware of what he wants and needs? Perhaps but since he is not able to read, that is making the situation a bit complicated.

Obviously, The parents loves this child but with being in the part of it's religion upbringing - I am a bit baffled because even if it was part of the religion upbringing, I would even do ANYthing to give my child a life even if it goes against my religion. Just saying.

The concern here is that his parents have convinced him that he will be fine without the medical treatment. Medical evidence has clearly shown that he will not be fine; he will die very soon. Thirteen year olds will believe what their parents tell them, expecially when the parents present it in a way that makes the doctors look like the bad guy putting poison in the kid's body. These parents are manipulating the trust a child puts in a parent, and they are taking advantage of the fact that he is not mature enough to seek the answers on his own.
 
I think the doctors and parents should both back off for a few days, offer some research and statstics and religious readings on the topic of cancer treatment and he should decide on his own from there.

I honestly think if he's presented some basic information from both sides, he can decide on his own without any pressure from either side one what to do. I think this is the only fair way to do it.
 
I think the doctors and parents should both back off for a few days, offer some research and statstics and religious readings on the topic of cancer treatment and he should decide on his own from there.

I honestly think if he's presented some basic information from both sides, he can decide on his own without any pressure from either side one what to do. I think this is the only fair way to do it.

Well, I agree that he should definately be involved, but my concern is that, at the age of 13, he is not able to think beyond the immediate moment to future implications. One of the reasons that teens get into trouble and find themselves in situations that make adults say, "Did you even think about what might have happened?" is because they simply can't think things through to a logical conclusion. Their frontal lobe simply hasn't developed enough to allow them to do that.
 
Well, I agree that he should definately be involved, but my concern is that, at the age of 13, he is not able to think beyond the immediate moment to future implications. One of the reasons that teens get into trouble and find themselves in situations that make adults say, "Did you even think about what might have happened?" is because they simply can't think things through to a logical conclusion. Their frontal lobe simply hasn't developed enough to allow them to do that.


Spelling error! Epic fail! :shock:
 
Back
Top