Plea by missing cancer patient's fath...

Plea by missing cancer patient's father goes unanswered so far

There are 30 comments on the TwinCities.com story from May 22, 2009, titled Plea by missing cancer patient's father goes unanswered so far. In it, TwinCities.com reports that:

Anthony Hauser, right, reads a statement Thursday directed to his wife, Colleen, who is missing along with their cancer-stricken son, Daniel, 13.

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

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Since: Jun 08

Saint Paul, MN

#21 May 25, 2009
Mellers wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, I'm more curious about what goes on in MN. Also, do you believe the parents of Daniel Hauser, have the right to make this medical decision for their son? What if the boy was 17? What if he were 5?
If my child was 13, you better believe that I and my wife would make the decision. Also for the five year old. The government has no business to tell me when, where or how I should treat a sickness or not treat a sickness.

A boy of 17. This is a tough call. I was 17 when I left home and worked my way through college. My folks did not have the money. I was the first (of 5) and only one in my family to go onto college and my parents told me I could go only if I could support myself. So I was young, naive and optimistic. I made my daily decisions but I am sure I would of involved my parents if a life threatening medical condition stared me in my face and I was unsure.

A good question Mellers.

Since: Jun 08

Saint Paul, MN

#22 May 25, 2009
Da Crusher_RIP wrote:
<quoted text>
Thomas,
I not an expert on birth control pills, however they may only be dispensed by a licensed pharmacist and only with a written prescription by a health care professional. Pharmacist Technicians are not allowed to fill prescriptions. Technicians are also licensed and pay an annual fee for that privilege.
The Minnesota Board of Pharmacy are responsible to set rules for all pharmacies in the state.
To alleviate your anguish, I would suggest you check out their web page.
https://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/rules/...

Unless the 17 year old is licensed as a pharmacist, they could not do it. If caught, the act could close the pharmacy. Pharmacy's are very well controlled by the state.
I hope now you can sleep better at night.
Have a peaceful Memorial Day
Da Crusher_RIP

I am also not an expert on birth control pills as my wife and I used natural family planning in our marriage.

Maybe I am to dense to understand but the following paragraph, I believe means that 17 year old girl can go into a drug store and buy a single dose of the morning after pill the same way you would buy a tube of toothpaste. Or a 17 year old boy could do the same if he had sexual relations with a (sorry Meller) 13 year old.

Washington, DC ( LifeNews.com )-- Top pro-life groups are upset that the Obama administration, through the Food and Drug Administration, has allowed 17-year-old girls the ability to purchase the morning after pill over the counter. The decision came on the heels of a federal court decision, but Family Research Council says “without so much as a whimper, it seems the Obama administration will acquiesce to” the ruling and “allow 17-year-olds to buy the morning-after pill without a prescription or their parents' consent.

Since: Jun 08

Saint Paul, MN

#23 May 25, 2009
Thank you to all our military, those that served and those serving, who provide us the freedom to live our lives in peace while they put their lives in danger.

“Wher's dem turkey necks?”

Since: Dec 08

Palm Desert, CA

#24 May 25, 2009
Thomas F Schraad wrote:
<quoted text>
Da Crusher_RIP
I am also not an expert on birth control pills as my wife and I used natural family planning in our marriage.
Maybe I am to dense to understand but the following paragraph, I believe means that 17 year old girl can go into a drug store and buy a single dose of the morning after pill the same way you would buy a tube of toothpaste. Or a 17 year old boy could do the same if he had sexual relations with a (sorry Meller) 13 year old.
Washington, DC ( LifeNews.com )-- Top pro-life groups are upset that the Obama administration, through the Food and Drug Administration, has allowed 17-year-old girls the ability to purchase the morning after pill over the counter. The decision came on the heels of a federal court decision, but Family Research Council says “without so much as a whimper, it seems the Obama administration will acquiesce to” the ruling and “allow 17-year-olds to buy the morning-after pill without a prescription or their parents' consent.
Not being condescending to ether you or myself,
but when comes to this female stuff, I feel like we are the blind leading the blind.

Sooo, being the curious type that I am, I googled the following question:

"What is the difference between a birth control pill and the day after pill?"

And this is the answer I found:

"Simple answer. Birth control pill contains hormones that will not allow a fertilized egg to implant. Morning after pill will kill an implanted egg."

So what from I understand, birth control pills are preventative and morning after pills will stop the whatever happened 'beneath the sheets' the night before.

Finally, I found this story about your concerns.

New York Times Editorial
April 23rd 2009
"In a further break from the Bush administration’s ideologically driven policies on birth control, the Food and Drug Administration has agreed to let 17-year-olds get the morning-after emergency contraceptive pills without a doctor’s prescription. It is a wise move that complies with a recent order by a federal judge, based on voluminous evidence in F.D.A. files that girls that young can use the pills safely."

I just read, the Stribe announced that the mother and son are returning to Minnesota and there will be a 5 pm CDT news conference today.

Since: Jun 08

Saint Paul, MN

#25 May 26, 2009
Da Crusher_RIP wrote:
<quoted text>
Not being condescending to ether you or myself, but when comes to this female stuff, I feel like we are the blind leading the blind.
Maybe not so blind. Your answer below states a lot.
Da Crusher_RIP wrote:
Sooo, being the curious type that I am, I googled the following question:
"What is the difference between a birth control pill and the day after pill?"
And this is the answer I found:
"Simple answer. Birth control pill contains hormones that will not allow a fertilized egg to implant. Morning after pill will kill an implanted egg."
As you stated in the above both did not "prevent" the start of life but ended the start of life. Pro life people call this an early abortion.

May I state that the birth control pill is used as a contraceptive, that is, it can (not always) prevent fertilization. The morning after pill is used to kill (not always) the start of life.
Da Crusher_RIP wrote:
So what from I understand, birth control pills are preventative and morning after pills will stop the whatever happened 'beneath the sheets' the night before.
Yes, you are mainly correct. Birth control pills are used as a contraceptive but they do not always work and the morning after pill will kill the fertilized egg (if the women was ovulating) but not always.
calvin

Saint Paul, MN

#26 May 26, 2009
Thomas F Schraad wrote:
<quoted text>
If my child was 13, you better believe that I and my wife would make the decision. Also for the five year old. The government has no business to tell me when, where or how I should treat a sickness or not treat a sickness.
.
In the Hauser case it is a life and death decision.

You say the government has no right to interfere in these individual's decision to make a prolife (get the chemo) or pro choice (it's their decision) approach to their personal family medical situation.

That's the thoughtful consistency we have come to expect from our right wing friends: parents have the right to choose death for a 13 year old; but, if a pregnant woman makes a decision that she does not wish to have a child the state will make that decision for her and her doctor.

“We're all connected”

Since: Feb 08

St Paul, MN

#27 May 26, 2009
calvin wrote:
<quoted text>
In the Hauser case it is a life and death decision.
You say the government has no right to interfere in these individual's decision to make a prolife (get the chemo) or pro choice (it's their decision) approach to their personal family medical situation.
That's the thoughtful consistency we have come to expect from our right wing friends: parents have the right to choose death for a 13 year old; but, if a pregnant woman makes a decision that she does not wish to have a child the state will make that decision for her and her doctor.
The irony is that most of the pro-choice people I know are also anti-war. Additionally the same pro-choice people do not like the idea/concept of abortion, and like me, probably have never/would never have an abortion, but do not feel we have the right to tell others what to choose.

I also support MN's decision for girls to need parental consent to have an abortion (legally, there are a few rare exceptions).

My stance on Danny's situation has everything to do with him being a minor.

Since: Jun 08

Saint Paul, MN

#28 May 26, 2009
calvin wrote:
<quoted text>
In the Hauser case it is a life and death decision.
You say the government has no right to interfere in these individual's decision to make a prolife (get the chemo) or pro choice (it's their decision) approach to their personal family medical situation.
That's the thoughtful consistency we have come to expect from our right wing friends: parents have the right to choose death for a 13 year old; but, if a pregnant woman makes a decision that she does not wish to have a child the state will make that decision for her and her doctor.
Calvin, you are looking at this from the wrong view point.

My decision (and theirs) is that we do not want death for the 13 year old. We want what is best for this child. If I firmly believed (which I do) that chemo was the only treatment to save my child, I would do so even if the Government said that we only could use alternative treatments.

I do not want the government to decide what medical treatment I or my child should have. As long as I am competent and have weighed the medical decisions that I have paid for and decided that the best way is for chemo. If the government says no chemo, I would tell them go to hell.

BTW, you are confusing the decision to kill a child with the decision as to the best way to keep a child alive.

We want both children to live, you are stating, I believe, that it is okay to kill one but not to kill the other.
calvin

Saint Paul, MN

#29 May 26, 2009
Thomas F Schraad wrote:
<quoted text>
Calvin, you are looking at this from the wrong view point.
My decision (and theirs) is that we do not want death for the 13 year old. We want what is best for this child. If I firmly believed (which I do) that chemo was the only treatment to save my child, I would do so even if the Government said that we only could use alternative treatments.
I do not want the government to decide what medical treatment I or my child should have. As long as I am competent and have weighed the medical decisions that I have paid for and decided that the best way is for chemo. If the government says no chemo, I would tell them go to hell.
BTW, you are confusing the decision to kill a child with the decision as to the best way to keep a child alive.
We want both children to live, you are stating, I believe, that it is okay to kill one but not to kill the other.
You are twisting logic when you theorize that the government would prevent the use of chemo.

The simple logic is this: if the parents choose a poultice of ground chicken feathers to treat cancer you are with the parents.

A fine and pure libertarian view of individual rights and a limited government: if the parents choose death through their own ignorance or other unknown motives, you are OK with it.

In this case your libertarian views out weigh your pro-life views. When/how do we get to the flip flop?.

Since: Jun 08

Saint Paul, MN

#30 May 27, 2009
calvin wrote:
<quoted text>
You are twisting logic when you theorize that the government would prevent the use of chemo.
The simple logic is this: if the parents choose a poultice of ground chicken feathers to treat cancer you are with the parents.
A fine and pure libertarian view of individual rights and a limited government: if the parents choose death through their own ignorance or other unknown motives, you are OK with it.
In this case your libertarian views out weigh your pro-life views. When/how do we get to the flip flop?.
I think we both have the same opinion but are using different words.

IF the medical people tell me that " poultice of ground chicken feathers" will treat my cancer and the government says no way, you are going to get chemo, why would I listen to the government.

In the case of the 13 year old, the government is correct (I believe). If you are not aware, I had non hodgins lymphoma and I took the chemo treatments and so far, I am a four year survivor. So for me it worked, by friend Ed, it didn't and he died about 1 1/2 years ago.

Should my friend (of 30 years) Ed tried alternative treatment? I don't know. He made his choice and I made mine. I won (so far) he lost.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
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
News Human remains found beside I-90 near Albert Lea Apr '15 tbenj 1
News Extraditing Victor Barnard from Brazil could ta... Mar '15 Jeff Sjolander 1
Heritagefest 2005 help needed! Feb '15 ThatguyfromStPaul 1
News River's Edge Boarding and Grooming offers safe,... (Nov '14) Nov '14 Gerald Vonberger 1
News Know Your Enemy: Minnesota (Sep '13) Jul '14 Sneaky Pete 3
News St. Paul archbishop, accused of touching boy, w... (Mar '14) Mar '14 tom 1
ILPEA Industries??? (Feb '14) Feb '14 someone 1
More from around the web

Sleepy Eye People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]