Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dksuddeth
and you know, if the child in question had been 6 and said he didn't want to be 'sick' from the chemo anymore, I might tend to side with the courts, just might. But 16 is old enough in this instance. Easily made aware of the consequences of not getting the 'normal' treatment.
Whoot, right there with ya.  |
at what age is someone "easily made aware of the consequences of getting the 'normal' treatment"?
and therein lies the problem
the kid's a minor, the state stepped in as they would have if the kid were 6
now, if he kills someone, i'm pretty sure he'll be tried as an adult...
as much as i hate to say it bc it does go against everything that is me, i gotta agree with the judge's decision to force treatment on the child on this one. The parents did no wrong, however, in supporting their child's decision to abandon 'normal' treatment.
I mean, do you think abortion opponents would like all 16 yr olds to have right to accept or refuse medical treatments on their own? Somehow, i feel it is tied into the adult vs minor nature of this whole trial.
I'm not saying it's right, just that it's what we got at the moment.