The boy is not even aware that he is sick, how does this qualify as having even a vague understanding of the situation? It is one place where I have problem a with this particular case.

Too many busy-bodies in here for me!

from o p



so he needs the chemo so he knows he is sick

have you seen anyone on chemo

there life is not a good one

Please read your quote again. The boy does not know he is sick, what he has a rudimentary understanding of what chemo is and what it will do to him. If the boy doesn't understand that he is fatally ill then why would he or anyone for that matter choose to have chemo?

The boy isnt old enough to make that decision for him self.
He's not mature enough to understand what is best!

But Im sure you are convinced that if you could restrain the parents rights then you could influence him to side with you against his parents cultural beliefs.

Is this your goal?

Does it talk about a boy that can't read or write and will die from cancer if he doesn't get chemotherapy and if he gets it, there's over a 90% survival rate? What about that boy!!

Actually no. But think the boy is entitled to know that he's sick. I also should think if the parents truly believe in what they are doing they would jump at the chance to prove it with a test. At the time of the writing of the OP that is all they were being asked to do.

His frontal brain is not fully developed yet. He doesn't understand the consequences in the sense that adults do.

The article, "Court filings also indicated Daniel has a learning disability and can't read."

Yeah, chemo sucks. It's a temporary situation with over a 90% cure rate for his type of cancer.

how can he have a



and not know he is sick

it is obvious if he has any understanding at all he knows something of why it is an option

that is the judges conflict of terms not mine

and that is what his court appointed lawyer is for

I realize I need to point something out here. I have never said that in the case in the of the OP I think the question of whether or not the court should step in is not at all cut and dry. I'm not at all sure I think they should but I do think that everyone involved should be making an informed decision.

Do the parents have no rights to privacy or benefit of doubt?

What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty!

Isn't it up to the state to prove they dont uphold the beliefs they claim?

If they dont then they should step in by by taking parental rights from the parents first, but they should be required to have just cause first!
If not then there should be penalties for their meddling!

Um I do believe that's why the tests were ordered so that doubts may be removed or confirmed. And yes they have some rights to privacy that's why it requires a court order to require them to give that information. That is the way it is in pretty much every case.




I have never said they are guilty, I really don't know. But you can't prove someone's innocence or guilt without a trial and without evidence.



That is one possible reason for the courts to step in... But how do you suggest they do that the state do that without a hearing of some sort?



First!? Before a hearing? Without any evidence?



All these things are what this case is about. Our whole system is based on having hearings and trials to determine what is right and just.

Please note I saw nothing to suggest that having the test done in anyway goes against the religious views of the parents. In fact even the chemo does not go against their views they simply believe there is another way. If there is any kind of evidence that they might be right then I believe the courts should back off, but so far there's no evidence to that effect.

Sorry about your luck!

Tuesday:

Arrest ordered for mom of boy, 13, resisting chemo

By AMY FORLITI, Associated Press Writer Amy Forliti, Associated Press Writer – 3 mins ago

NEW ULM, Minn. – A judge issued an arrest warrant Tuesday for the mother of a 13-year-old boy resisting chemotherapy after the pair missed a court hearing on his welfare.

Brown County District Judge John Rodenberg also ordered that Daniel Hauser be placed in protective custody so he can get proper medical treatment for Hodgkin's lymphoma.

The cancer is considered highly curable with proper treatment, but Daniel quit chemo after a single treatment and with his parents opted instead for "alternative medicines," citing religious beliefs. That led authorities to seek custody. Rodenberg last week ruled that Daniel's parents, Colleen and Anthony Hauser, were medically neglecting their son.

The family was due in court Tuesday to tell the judge results of a chest X-ray and arrangements for an oncologist. But Daniel's father was the only one who appeared. He told Rodenberg he last saw Colleen Hauser on Monday evening.

"She said she was going to leave," Hauser testified. "She said, `That's all you need to know.' And that's all I know."

He said his wife left her cell phone at home.

The family's doctor, James Joyce, testified by telephone that Daniel's tumor has grown and he needs immediate assessment by a pediatric cancer doctor.

Joyce said he examined Daniel on Monday, with an X-ray showing that his tumor had grown to the size it was when he was first diagnosed.

"He had basically gotten back all the trouble he had in January," the doctor said.

Daniel was accompanied by his mother and Susan Daya, who Joyce said was an attorney from California.

Joyce testified that he offered to make appointments for Daniel with oncologists at Children's Hospital, the University of Minnesota, Mayo Clinic or elsewhere, but the Hausers declined.

He also said he tried to give Daniel more information about lymphoma but that Daya, Daniel and his mother left in a rush.

"Under Susan Daya's urging, they indicated they had other places to go," Joyce said.

Daya did not immediately return a page left on her cell phone Tuesday by The Associated Press. Her voice mailbox was full.

Besides examining Daniel's chest X-ray, Joyce also said he asked Daniel how he was feeling. The doctor said the boy told him he had pain on the right side of his chest, which Daniel rated a 10 on a scale of 1 to 10.

Joyce said the pain was around the port that was inserted into Daniel's chest to administer chemotherapy. He attributed the pain to the growing tumor, which is pushing the port out of place.

Daniel also told the doctor he had a cough, though he wasn't having any trouble breathing, Joyce said.

Daniel's court-appointed attorney, Phil Elbert, asked Joyce if Daniel was at risk of substantial physical harm if no action is taken. The doctor said yes.

In his ruling last week, Rodenberg wrote that he would not order chemotherapy if Daniel's prognosis was poor. But if the outlook was good, it appeared chemotherapy and possibly radiation was in the boy's best interest, he wrote.

Daniel's lymphoma was diagnosed in January, and six rounds of chemotherapy were recommended. Daniel underwent one round in February but stopped after that single treatment. He and his parents sought other opinions, but the doctors agreed with the initial assessment.

Colleen Hauser testified at the earlier hearing that her son "is not in any medical danger." She said she had been treating his cancer with herbal supplements, vitamins, ionized water and other natural alternatives.

Rodenberg wrote that state statutes require parents to provide necessary medical care for a child. The statutes say alternative and complementary health care methods aren't enough.

He also wrote that Daniel, who cannot read, did not understand the risks and benefits of chemotherapy and didn't believe he was ill.

Daniel testified that he believed the chemo would kill him and told the judge in private testimony unsealed later that if anyone tried to force him to take it, "I'd fight it. I'd punch them and I'd kick them."

The Hausers, who have eight children, are Roman Catholic. They also believe in the "do no harm" philosophy of the Nemenhah Band, a Missouri-based religious group that believes in natural healing methods advocated by some American Indians.

The judge sounds like he is being considerate to me.