Written by Daniel Hauser, the 13-year-old Minnesota boy whose parents supported his refusal of chemotherapy until the court stepped in, had another meeting with the judge in the case and, based on reports that the treatment continues to be working, the order to continue with chemo stands.
We’ve talked about Daniel often on Motherlode, and while there was some disagreement in the comments, most of you seemed to believe that it was the right of the authorities to step in when parents are making unwise medical choices. I agree. But now comes news that a New Jersey court has, under this same theory, ordered a child (identified in court papers as V.M.G.) to remain in foster care, where she has apparently been for two years, initially because her mother (V.M.) refused a C-section while in labor and demonstrated “combative and erratic behavior.”
Doctors thought the C-section was necessary; the laboring mother did not. As it happens, she was right, because the baby was born vaginally, and healthy. But the court has upheld the original petition by the New Jersey Division of Youth and Family Services (NJDYF) that the mother “abused and neglected” her child. (The court reversed similar charges against the father, B.G., and also said their reason in upholding was not the c-section per se, but rather other factors brought to the bench by authorities.)
There are details in the court documents describing those other factors. In investigating the referral from the hospital, the NJDYF learned that “V.M. had been under psychiatric care for 12 years prior to V.M.G’s birth.” But the mother’s mental health was not the reason given for placing the child in foster care in the first place. The refusal of the C-section, and the behavior around the actual birth, were.
Reaction to this case across the Web (there is an excellent analysis over on Momlogic.com) is that authorities here went too far. That was my gut reaction too. Personally, I can’t imagine refusing a C-section if my OB told me it was necessary. But isn’t everyone “erratic” when in labor?
Democracy; Only Good When it Serves the Elite?
2009 Leave a Comment
“The American republic; it’s not your founding forefathers’ representative democracy anymore”
Szandor Blestman
I’m not a huge fan of democracy. I think it’s over rated and that the propaganda espousing its greatness has indoctrinated many people into believing that mob rule is the best political system ever created. My favorite description of a democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner. Early on in the history of the American federal government certain changes were made to the Constitution to help establish more of a democracy type government that certain influential founders had warned against. The corruptible influences of such disregard for the original intentions and spirit that our forefathers wanted to impart upon our nation is now obvious for all to see. Democratic rule is well intentioned, however, even if it is true the a majority of people can at times be wrong about a given issue. It is the system we as Americans must deal with in our everyday lives, so we may as well make the best of it as often as possible. READ MORE »