• Tips gratefully accepted here. Thanks!:

  • Recent Comments

    Propertius on Goodbye to All That–Twit…
    Beata on Goodbye to All That–Twit…
    Propertius on Goodbye to All That–Twit…
    Propertius on Dana Loesch says the quiet par…
    Propertius on I am not a general…
    Beata on Dana Loesch says the quiet par…
    William on Dana Loesch says the quiet par…
    William on Dana Loesch says the quiet par…
    lililam on Dana Loesch says the quiet par…
    lililam on Dana Loesch says the quiet par…
    William on Dana Loesch says the quiet par…
    Beata on Dana Loesch says the quiet par…
    jmac on Dana Loesch says the quiet par…
    Beata on Dana Loesch says the quiet par…
    Beata on Dana Loesch says the quiet par…
  • Categories


  • Tags

    abortion Add new tag Afghanistan Al Franken Anglachel Atrios bankers Barack Obama Bernie Sanders big pharma Bill Clinton cocktails Conflucians Say Dailykos Democratic Party Democrats Digby DNC Donald Trump Donna Brazile Economy Elizabeth Warren feminism Florida Fox News General Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Goldman Sachs health care Health Care Reform Hillary Clinton Howard Dean John Edwards John McCain Jon Corzine Karl Rove Matt Taibbi Media medicare Michelle Obama Michigan misogyny Mitt Romney Morning Edition Morning News Links Nancy Pelosi New Jersey news NO WE WON'T Obama Obamacare OccupyWallStreet occupy wall street Open thread Paul Krugman Politics Presidential Election 2008 PUMA racism Republicans research Sarah Palin sexism Single Payer snark Social Security Supreme Court Terry Gross Texas Tim Geithner unemployment Wall Street WikiLeaks women
  • Archives

  • History

    October 2022
    S M T W T F S
     1
    2345678
    9101112131415
    16171819202122
    23242526272829
    3031  
  • RSS Paul Krugman: Conscience of a Liberal

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
  • The Confluence

    The Confluence

  • RSS Suburban Guerrilla

  • RSS Ian Welsh

    • Rationality Is A Process, Not A Conclusion (Nuclear Weapons Edition)
      A lot of mistakes come from assuming rationality means “thinks the same way I do” rather than “reasons from premises I might not share.” Left than 1/1000 economists predicted the financial collapse, because they reasoned from assumptions like “the market is self-correcting” or “housing prices never go down.” (Sometimes both at the same time, which is rarely […]
  • Top Posts

Difficult Questions: When Freedom and Law Collide – Parental Rights and Medical Choices

I’ve decided to start a series on complex questions that are fodder for interesting discussion and debate.  Several issues have arisen lately that raise questions about the role of government and the courts in regulating the behavior of society.  Where the lines are drawn are certainly not cut and dry.  When do our personal rights end and the ability for the government to intervene begin?  No better example of such a blurry line is the case of Daniel Hauser.  Daniel is a 13 year old boy suffering from Hodgkin’s Lymphoma.  His family believed that alternative medicine and natural therapies were the best course of treatment for their son.  They believed that the recommended treatment of chemotherapy was comparable to poison and therefore refused this medical intervention.

colleen-and-daniel-hauser

Colleen Hauser and her son Daniel

The state of Minnesota charged the parents with medical neglect.  The judge ruled against the Hauser family citing two instances of medical neglect.

There were two government rulings against the family for failure to follow “their family doctor’s decision” or “instructions from a medical professional.”

This raises some interesting questions, including:

Where do individual rights end and the right of our government or the medical profession begin?  Where do parental rights end and what are the implication of being required to follow specific medical strategies when there are many to choose from? Who should have the right to decide which are the best treatments?  What about the right to avoid the side effects?

I think it’s also important to note that there are laws in Minnesota that state that prohibit parents from relying soley on herbal and alternative treatments if a child’s life is at risk; but is this law overly invasive of personal freedoms or are there sufficient social needs that support it?

Let’s have a debate.  Ignore whether you believe in alternative treatments or herbal remedies.  Focus on the questions about where societies’ needs may supercede individual rights in this case.  There is certainly no evidence that the parents were neglectful in any other area and appear to be loving and caring.

Source article: Minnesota Judge Overrides Parents’ Objections To Son’s Cancer Treatment

Rules – stick to polite, respectful debate with no name-calling.   Violators will only be warned once.  This is a chance to give your debate chops a good workout.