chemo against your will? Options

[PurpleDaze112]

I was checking my email just now on yahoo and a news story on the page said that a 13 year old boy was forced by the court to receive chemotherapy to treat his lymphoma. The boy and his parents agreed on trying alternative medicine to treat the illness due to religious purposes. Involuntary medical attentuon, if it has the realistic possibility of saving lives, is entirely legal if the patient is a minor.

Personally, I think that the practice should be disallowed if the minor in question is at a pyschological level that puts them in a place where professionals can be certain that the choice to forgo certain medical practices is the minor's own. But since that boy's lymphoma had a 90% chance of being wiped out by the chemo, I think he's a dumbass for not getting treatment. Still, it comes down to the fact that one can do whatever they want with their body, even if it means letting it die.

[karmakiller]

I think it depends on the type of chemotherapy that a person has, but (from the people that I know) radiation can leave more visible damage. It's been some time since my mother has had radiation therapy, but she was burned pretty bad and she still has problems. I can't really base anything about chemotherapy on what my mother has gone through because she's gone through chemo so much that she isn't a "typical" chemo patient.