Judge rules Sleepy Eye teen must unde...

Judge rules Sleepy Eye teen must undergo chemotherapy

There are 162 comments on the TwinCities.com story from May 15, 2009, titled Judge rules Sleepy Eye teen must undergo chemotherapy. In it, TwinCities.com reports that:

A 13-year-old Minnesota teen must undergo chemotherapy for cancer, a Brown County District Court judge ruled today, even though the toxic treatment contradicts the spiritual beliefs of his family.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at TwinCities.com.

First Prev
of 9
Next Last
It Is What It Is

Cottage Grove, MN

#1 May 15, 2009
Good for the judge, and I hope it helps this young man.
JBL

Minneapolis, MN

#2 May 15, 2009
While I realize that the judge is most likely saving this boy's life, I do believe he should have let these people pursue the treatment they wanted. It is not good policy for the government to interfere in private health matters.
Natasha Badanoff

Minneapolis, MN

#3 May 15, 2009
Tough decision, but in this instance the best the judge could do. When the kid turns 18 and he wants to complain about being alive. So be it.
No place for a judge

Houston, MN

#4 May 15, 2009
The courts have no place in mandating medical treatment for any individual. Clearly the pharmaceutical companies have a great deal more money than this family. Any attorney that doubts the 'genuineness' of anything needs to look in a mirror! Imagine a single judge telling you that you HAD to submit your child to anything you clearly didn't want to---and that you would go to jail if you didn't! This is an outrage!
By the way, if my child had cancer, I would most likely utilize the chemo that surely would be recommended. That isn't the issue. No court should be mandating ANY treatment for a child. That is still the parents' responsiblity and the government needs to respect that.
amidude

Lakeville, MN

#5 May 15, 2009
Never is it a good thing for a judge to mandate what a parent can and can not do for their child. You don't know the specifics. Notice how the media did not get specific and tell you the exact type of cancer he has. (there is more than one type of NHL) Some types are treatable with alternative means and do NOT require chemo. It sounds too fishy to me though. Oh and I'm a survivor so I know what I'm talking about. This ruling is going to set a dangerous precedent.
Alison from Kansas

Gardner, KS

#6 May 15, 2009
Thank goodness the judge had this boys best interest in mind since apparently the parents did not. Six months of a rough time going through chemo vs. loosing your child.....doesnt seem like a hard choice. I dont see how this goes against their faith but I think that was just an excuse anyway. I pray the boy will recover soon and that his parents "get it".
Good luck Daniel, I will be praying for you and those wonderful Dr.s who will be caring for you!
lobster68w

Dugway, UT

#7 May 15, 2009
While I think the kids decision is ridiculous, I find it absolutely appalling that the government thinks it can dictate an individuals health care choices. The government as NO BUSINESS being involved here.
No spin zone

Forest Lake, MN

#8 May 15, 2009
This is a tough one I hate to see the government in peoples lives like this.
daML

Minneapolis, MN

#9 May 15, 2009
This sets a bad, bad precedent.

JTY

Since: Sep 08

Olathe, KS

#10 May 15, 2009
Should the government get involved if they were say not feeding the boy, or otherwise abusing him? How is that any different then if they are refusing to give him life saving medical treatment.
Reality

United States

#11 May 15, 2009
Just up and move to Iowa or South Dakota.
Big Bobby

Minneapolis, MN

#12 May 15, 2009
I agree that the Government should not be in the business of making health care decisions for ADULTS. This is a 13 year old boy, not an adult. What if the parents would not give a 5 year old insulin? How about a 7 year old? 9? 13? The government has to protect CHILDREN from neglect by parents. You can't beat your child because you beleive that's ok. You can't lock your child in a cage. I hate nanny Government more than most people, but in this case I think the judge made the right call.
It Is What It Is

Cottage Grove, MN

#13 May 15, 2009
JTY wrote:
Should the government get involved if they were say not feeding the boy, or otherwise abusing him? How is that any different then if they are refusing to give him life saving medical treatment.
Excellent point...and, this kid is 13 - don't know any 13 year-old's who have the life experience to make such an huge decision about what's in his best interest. No doubt, he's heavily influenced in not controlled by his parent's belief systems.

I don't believe in the government meddling in areas where they don't need to, but I see this case as a 'need to'- he's just a kid, and very sick at that.
Jester

Hopkins, MN

#14 May 15, 2009
This will make its way to the supreme court in my opinion. Although the boys decision is not one the masses agree on, it is his personal choice. This is not an issue we should have the hands of government in... plain and simple.
NoDoubt

Saint Paul, MN

#15 May 15, 2009
Having children takes considerable responsibility and when parents show a lack of it, the courts take their decision away from them. Anyone who has trouble with that should consider moving to a country such as the middle east where the government and religion are one body. Good luck with that!
CRASH 57

Rochester, MN

#16 May 15, 2009
THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CHILD MUST COME FIRST!

While it is a tough decision, the courts, even in the face of differing cultural or religious beliefs, must protect the child.

The courts (and parents) cannot be selective in what is OK for parents to do and not do. The state cannot allow incest, nor can the state allow parents to NOT GIVE MEDICAL CARE!

Allow Mayo Clinic to treat the child and we all pray for a successful outcome. Prayer at this will help even the best medical care.
Ted

Saint Paul, MN

#17 May 15, 2009
We are truly now in a communist country. The liberals have destroyed America.
Observation

Boise, ID

#18 May 15, 2009
Bottom Line.........

What does the kid want?

It's his body.

Every one of the pro-choice people out there should be howling!
Pro-choice unite

Houston, MN

#19 May 15, 2009
Observation wrote:
Bottom Line.........
What does the kid want?
It's his body.
Every one of the pro-choice people out there should be howling!
Absolutely!!

JTY

Since: Sep 08

Olathe, KS

#21 May 15, 2009
Observation wrote:
Bottom Line.........
What does the kid want?
It's his body.
Every one of the pro-choice people out there should be howling!
And if he wants to drink, smoke, do drugs, or injure him self? I can't speak for the pro-choice crowd, but as pro-lifer this is a no brainer.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 9
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Sleepy Eye Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Corey Sass (Aug '16) Aug '16 Wondering 1
Election Who do you support for State Senate in Minnesot... (Nov '10) Aug '16 matt 4
Brandon lesley (Jul '16) Jul '16 Justpassingby 1
News Eagles Extravaganza (Apr '16) Apr '16 Windy Leaf 1
News Human remains found beside I-90 near Albert Lea (Apr '15) Apr '15 tbenj 1
News Extraditing Victor Barnard from Brazil could ta... (Mar '15) Mar '15 Jeff Sjolander 1
Gary Anderson (Jan '13) Feb '14 Nancy 2

Sleepy Eye Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Sleepy Eye Mortgages