MINNEAPOLIS – A Minnesota judge ruled Friday that a 13-year-old cancer patient must be evaluated by a doctor to determine if the boy would benefit from restarting chemotherapy over his parents' objections.

In a 58-page ruling, Brown County District Judge John Rodenberg found that Daniel Hauser has been "medically neglected" by his parents, Colleen and Anthony Hauser, and was in need of child protection services.

While he allowed Daniel to stay with his parents, the judge gave the Hausers until Tuesday to get an updated chest X-ray for their son and select an oncologist.

If the evaluation shows the cancer had advanced to a point where chemotherapy and radiation would no longer help, the judge said, he would not order the boy to undergo treatment.

The judge wrote that Daniel has only a "rudimentary understanding at best of the risks and benefits of chemotherapy. ... he does not believe he is ill currently. The fact is that he is very ill currently."

Daniel's court-appointed attorney, Philip Elbert, called the decision unfortunate.

"I feel it's a blow to families," he said. "It marginalizes the decisions that parents face every day in regard to their children's medical care. It really affirms the role that big government is better at making our decisions for us."

Elbert said he hadn't spoken to his client yet. The phone line at the Hauser home in Sleepy Eye in southwestern Minnesota had a busy signal Friday. The parents' attorney had no immediate comment but planned to issue a statement.

Daniel was diagnosed with Hodgkin's lymphoma and stopped chemotherapy in February after a single treatment. He and his parents opted instead for "alternative medicines" based on their religious beliefs.

Child protection workers accused Daniel's parents of medical neglect; but in court, his mother insisted the boy wouldn't submit to chemotherapy for religious reasons and she said she wouldn't comply if the court orders it.

Doctors have said Daniel's cancer had up to a 90 percent chance of being cured with chemotherapy and radiation. Without those treatments, doctors said his chances of survival are 5 percent.

Daniel's parents have been supporting what they say is their son's decision to treat the disease with nutritional supplements and other alternative treatments favored by the Nemenhah Band.

The Missouri-based religious group believes in natural healing methods advocated by some American Indians.

After the first chemotherapy treatment, the family said they wanted a second opinion, said Dr. Bruce Bostrom, a pediatric oncologist who recommended Daniel undergo chemotherapy and radiation.

They later informed him that Daniel would not undergo any more chemotherapy. Bostrom said Daniel's tumor shrunk after the first chemotherapy session, but X-rays show it has grown since he stopped the chemotherapy.

"My son is not in any medical danger at this point," Colleen Hauser testified at a court hearing last week. She also testified that Daniel is a medicine man and elder in the Nemenhah Band.

The family's attorney, Calvin Johnson, said Daniel made the decision himself to refuse chemotherapy, but Brown County said he did not have an understanding of what it meant to be a medicine man or an elder.

Court filings also indicated Daniel has a learning disability and can't read.

The Hausers have eight children. Colleen Hauser told the New Ulm Journal newspaper that the family's Catholicism and adherence to the Nemenhah Band are not in conflict, and that she has used natural remedies to treat illness.

Nemenhah was founded in the 1990s by Philip Cloudpiler Landis, who said Thursday he once served four months in prison in Idaho for fraud related to advocating natural remedies.

Landis said he founded the faith after facing his diagnosis of a cancer similar to Daniel Hauser. He said he treated it with diet choices, visits to a sweat lodge and other natural remedies.

I think that in this case its warranted what the judge has done. A second opinion in such cases in my opinion is a must. Maybe a third even. And if it is agreed that the chemo would save this child then I say make him a ward of the state and go for it. And in the meantime prosecute the parents for child neglect. I have never been an advocate of church or religion doctrines. And especially if started by someone who apparently is a fraud. So I have to ask is there help available for the mental side of the parents. Just what are they thinking? Oh



I get it 8 kids. to many mouths to feed . Seems like a harmless way to rid themselves of that. what azz wholes

I get a feeling this is going to get moved lol

But I do know chemo is hard on people. If there is an alternative thta would work...I would try that....but I would do what I had to for my son

ok, I understand the whole choice thing for adults, but, I have thought of this before, where do these people think these treatments and cures etc.. come from,,, God has given the human race a way to take care of ourselves. God gave us the knowledge and ability to learn and help eachother, and those who dont see that, I feel sad for them!!

If it does, I'll know where to post the next one like this...
I am not a parent but I feel like you, maybe I will go to hell but my child will get what is necessary...

I do know there are good alternative medicines for many things...but if it demands it...I would do chemo or meds. but only if needed.

(BTW....I saw this article earlier and almost posted it myself lol)

I am not religious in any way other than I believe there is an entity that deserves my respect and thanks for creating this chain reaction which is Earth and Man. I believe you're right in that God gave us the ability to think, ponder and discover what is possible. She's blessed us...

My daughter happen to mention this story to me yesterday. Seems several think they are refusing the treatments due to the cost which is bull due to there is way too many cancer society's that are for kids that are ran on donations.

I can understand anyone that would rather go a different way then chemo to see if it works. I do understand that there are religions or those that do not believe in modern day medicine as well.

But..........regardless this would have never made the news if in fact the doctors did not feel that the parents were actually putting this child's life on the line.

According to the doctors the tumor had shrunk with the first treatment but has grown since the treatments have stopped that should tell you something. If they wait too long and let the tumor grow then the treatments will not only take longer but be harder for the boy as well.

To me they have gave the parents time to see if their way would work it has not so now it is time for the state to step in. JMO

You know this kind of thing is what makes me really dislike sheeple.

The child had no choice of religion. He is a living viable human being with a heart, a mind and his own will; a will almost completely shaped by his parents and their religious and world view.

Are parents within their rights to kill their child?

If I decided not to take my child to the doctor when he was injured and instead just sat around and fervently hoped the flying spaghetti monster would heal him I would go to jail for neglect.

Aren't religious pro-life people always howling about the rights of an unborn fetus to life? What about this child's right to life?

To that I have a question. How many people here follow the same religion as their parents in the same manner as their parents?

lynann....there are many religions...and these parents don't follow the same as me

I'm thinking that they don't belong to a church. It sounds like they belong to a cult.

If you are pro-choice you can not be against the parents right to determine what medical interventions they will allow for their children.

If you uphold the Constitution you can not be against a parent who lives in accordance with a religious belief. If that belief is to deny medical treatment to their child we have NO RIGHT to step in.

If a person is willfully causing harm to a child with no basis for doing so, society may have a right to step in.

We may not have the whole story, there may be 'abuse' or 'neglect' that we are unaware of.

OR there may be a reasonable foundation from which the parents decisions are stemming, that we are also unaware of.

How much control do you REALLY want the government to have in ruling over your private life? That is exactly the reason the Constitution was created, to restrict the amount of control of constituants.

Choose your stands but choose them with a full understanding of all the situations they may involve.

I can see both ways on this.

There's plenty of Christian groups who don't believe in science/medical things, and won't let their children be treated. They aren't cults, despite the comment below.

The medical field is quick to blitz natural herbs/alternative treatments, and other ways of curing diseases. Does anyone else pay attention to the Big Pharma's crap about controlling alternative fields of health. They're fighting tooth and nail to ban so much of this stuff.

And sometimes the cure is worse then the disease. Cancer, chemo and radition fries the body. Cancer may equal death, but it's more peaceful.

Well said!

I know this is just going to be a smear campain against the Christians(as the baiting title)but the core of this issue has little to do with religion and a lot to do with big brother.This is not a religious issue.This issue is what rights we have of parents and how much control our government has over those rights.I look at this topic as a very important issue(espcially since power hungry Obama wants control over everything).If you are going to let judges decide what kind of medical care your children get you are opening a very dangerous can of worms.I say this because the government is going to force both you and your children to get treatment and shots you may not care or want to get.I could give one example.The Flu shot.What if it was madatory that judges told us that we and our children had to get a flu shot every year.Refusal could result in prison time and loss of children(such as this case).Anyone who has done any reasearch of what the flu shot contains knows it is loaded with toxic chemicals including Mercury and formaldehyde.I never get the flu shot and I would be mad as hell if I was forced to get it.

Remember the gulf war vetrens and how sick they got over the shots they had to get in case of a chemical attack?If you think the government knows what is best for you then you are wrong.They don't know their ass from their elbow and half the time they rush through these things with out even doing any reasearch on long term effects.

As far as this case in concerned.Cancer treatment has come a long ways.There is many effictive alternatives besides chemo.The son has agreed he does not want it.The parents have agreed they do not want it.As far as the legal issues.There is nothing written in the constituion that you have to accept medical care from a judge or a doctor.


I find it very ironic that the pro choice movement fully supports the murder of a unborn baby and says it is the right of the mother.But you have three people all in agreement that they do not want to go through this procedure and yet where is the choice of the mother on this one?

This paragraph doesn't make any sense. The article said the whole immediate family agrees with their decision and the whole immediate family will fight to not have the chemo done.

And I don't see how it's a smear campaign against Christianity. At most, it'll be a smear campaign against "new age" alternative type treatments.

Flu and vaccine shots. Read the updates, there isn't any of the kind of mercury that poisons a person. I do agree with you on the flu shot, though, as everytime I've done it, I get horrendously sick, but that's because a vaccine purposely infects the body.

There's something else wrong with the shots, but I think our environment has more to do with it.

Though in the case of animals, we're over-vaccinating big time, but that's a whole other thread.

EquusDancer....based on this in the article

"The Missouri-based religious group believes in natural healing methods advocated by some American Indians."


I believe you are right.

CNN.com recently reprinted an article from Health.Com about the flu shot. This article cites medical professionals and researchers who aren’t comfortable with the ingredients found in the flu shot. In fact, one chemical, a preservative called thimerosal, is banned in vaccinations and medications in various U.S. States including California, New York and Delaware. Yet the majority of flu shot manufacturers still use thimerosal as a preservative. The concern is that thimerosal is about 50% mercury and the link between mercury and Autism is still undetermined. Although there are some flu shots available that don’t have mercury, they are a minority and usually are only available by special request.

In addition to the concern regarding thimerosal, there are other ingredients in the flu shots that are questionable: formaldehyde, monosodium glutamate (MSG), ethylene glycol (also found in antifreeze) and aluminum. In fact, various studies have shown that individuals who have more than five flu shots in consecutive years are 10 times more likely to get Alzheimer’s due to Aluminum toxicity. (One such study was conducted by Dr. Hugh Fudenberg, Founder and Director of Research, NeuroImmuno Therapeutic Research Foundation)

The debate or main topic of this post was about the government intervening in a childs life to save it against the parents rights to develope that child. This pertains to it how?

Im thinking the west may never have been pioneered if the Department of Child Welfare and Social Services existed in the mid 1800!

Just think about all those people who packed their families up in wagons and hauled them through deserts, blizzards, and threat of Indian attacks. All this done with nay a Dr in sight. No heat in the winter, and no AC in the summer. Snakes, Scorpions, Mt. Lions, and Grizzly bears.