Coercive Chemotherapy - 5/10/2009 - Hour 1
Coercive Chemotherapy – What is the state’s role in mandating medical treatments to which which parents are opposed? Why does government side with chemotherapeutic oncology rather than being a neutral arbiter of the common law?
Doctors are once again proclaiming that refusing their medicine is an automatic death sentence. Does arrogance know no limits? Does the sanctity of the family mean anything when it comes to government monopolies on cancer care?
This question was supposed to be settled with the writing of the Declaration of Independence. Benjamin Rush was prophetic about what would happen if we did not put medical freedom explicitly into the Constitution.
Are we really that confused about the limited contractual role for government in a free society? Our understanding is being tested by a 13 year old Minnesota boy who, with the support of his family, is refusing chemo. Will the government next force you to shop at Walgreen’s instead of your local health food store? Your choice or the state’s choice?
In the News: Doctors: Minnesota boy resisting chemotherapy for cancer will likely die “Daniel Hauser, of Sleepy Eye, is at the center of a legal struggle in which Brown County authorities accuse his parents of medical neglect.“ I hear people are wanting to charge the parents with homicide if the child should die. What of all the deaths CAUSED by oncologists? Why is it different? Oh yeah, they actually have a government license to kill.
