Medical treatment trumps religious beliefs, courts say

[cbayer]

http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/news/us/medicine-trumps-religious-beliefs-courts-say-700912/

But Ohio case involving Amish exposes gray area
August 27, 2013 12:25 am

By David Templeton / Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

When the religious beliefs of parents conflict with the medical needs of the child, medical care trumps religion.

In Pennsylvania, and most other states, the law allows health and government officials to get court approval to provide medical care to save a child's life over the parents' religious objections.

But in Akron, Ohio, where Amish parents removed their 10-year-old daughter from the hospital to avoid further chemotherapy, the issue enters a legal gray area.

"I think this is a more heartrending question," said Wes Oliver, associate professor of law and director of the Criminal Justice Program at the Duquesne Law School. "Do you require parents to take extraordinary measures to give a child a percentage chance of survival, or do you leave that decision for the parents?"


Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/news/us/medicine-trumps-religious-beliefs-courts-say-700912/#ixzz2dBUvshSV

[cleanhippie]

1. So sad we need a court to rule on something that should be common sense.

[bowens43]

2. hmmmmm... modern science or iron age goatherder mythology ... tough decision

[cbayer]

3. This is about something more complex than that.

The religious reasons for this particular family taking out of the hospital may be just a tool to avoid horrible and possibly futile chemotherapy.

It really doesn't have anything to do with science or "iron age goatherder mythology".

[cleanhippie]

4. And yet it really does have EVERYTHING to do with it.

We're it not for the mythology, we likely would not even be reading about this taking place.
Please, cbayer, stop pretending that religious beliefs have nothing to do with these issues. They ARE the reason for these issues.

[okasha]

5. Referring to the story itself rather than just the headline,

the parents are said to have taken the child off chemotherapy because it was "hurting, not helping her," a "quality of life" issue rather than a religious one.

Now, the parents may be mistaken in their judgement because the 5-year and long term survival rates are high. But that's not necessarily to do with religion. It apparently has at least as much to do with her parents' perception of harm being done to their child.

In re which, chemotherapy and radiation effectively poison the patient. I have a friend who just came off radiation last week, and the therapy has taken a hell of a lot out of him. He'll be the better for it, eventually, but he's an educated man and recognizes the long-term benefit vs. the short-term cost. Someone should have made the process clearer to the parents, who apparently don't have a real understanding of the cost-benefit ratio here.

[Lordquinton]

6. This seems to be the case presented in the article

and the Headline is misleading. Something left to the professionals, and not really the demesne of a religion broad, this time.

[cbayer]

7. That was my takeaway as well.

The survival rates with treatment for this are not all that encouraging. And anyone who has seen a child tortured by this kind of treatment can understand the torment that parents go through in making decisions about how much treatment and when to stop it.

Apparently the families religious beliefs did not prevent them from starting treatment, but there comes a point when you just can't agree to the continuing torture of your child unless you truly feel that the benefits outweigh the costs.

And that's not always that clear.