Girl, 11, with cancer is free to refuse chemotherapy

[say what]

Ontario Children’s Aid officials have closed their investigation into the family of a girl who is refusing chemotherapy treatment, effectively leaving it up to the 11-year-old to decide her own care.

“The more we looked at it we realized that this is a warm, loving family,” said Andy Koster, executive director of the Children’s Aid Society of Brant. “We don’t believe that bringing her into care, taking her away from that family – which is her support – and forcing chemotherapy, is going to be in any way emotionally sound for her, or psychologically or even spiritually.”

The Children’s Aid Society intervened after Makayla Sault, an 11-year-old New Credit First Nation girl, decided to treat her cancer with native medicine rather than chemotherapy.

Mr. Koster said he met with the girl’s parents and community members on Tuesday. Mr. Koster said the group was “very pleased” to hear the news that the agency was closing its intake file.

“This is a family that’s been under a lot of stress. It’s a very tragic situation in terms of her illness and we just don’t wish to make it worse,” he said.

Makayla is suffering from a unique form of Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia, the most common form of childhood cancer. Under proper treatment, it has a survivability rate as high as 80% for children.

The girl’s disease went into remission after undergoing an initial 11 weeks of chemotherapy at McMaster Children’s Hospital. Treatments were planned to continue but she asked to stop chemotherapy after she experienced severe side effects such as nausea, loss of appetite and weight loss.

In an email to the National Post, the hospital said health-care professionals have a legal obligation to alert authorities when they believe a child may be at risk.

Mr. Koster said Makayla’s “voice had to be heard.”

“Under our Child and Family Services act we have to recognize the traditions and the community of First Nations people who are given rights under the act,” he said.

Mr. Koster said the agency was given legal advice on the case and that it was not difficult to come to the final decision.

When asked if he was concerned about backlash from the public regarding the agency’s decision, Mr. Koster said: “We can live with the decision we made.”

Nahnda Garlow, who has been acting as the Sault family’s spokeswoman, described the family’s reaction to the new to Two Row Times newspaper. “Makayla’s family members embraced one another with happy tears and the youth of the New Credit First Nation came together to sing honour songs for the family.”

[video=youtube;NrF5wWQ4hIU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrF5wWQ4hIU[/video]

********************************

What do you guys think about a child determining their course of care. Is it right for someone so young to hold that power? Do they know the consequences and can they fully understand the impact of their actions? When is it neglect from the parents? When should the state step in? If we believe we have the choice to determine our care, is there an age limit?

 

[muir]

Ditch the chemo, go on a purely organic diet and take marijuana oil

Cancer is a fungus of the body

Salvestrols which are naturally occuring on fruit and vegetables fight fungal growth, but when the fruit and veg are sprayed with herbicides and pesticides it destroys the salvestrols

So EAT organic if you want the salvestrols

And avoid the aspartame (nutrasweet) drinks, monosodium glutomate foods, E numbers and vaccines (especially ones containing thimerosol) and ditch non organic cosmetics, soaps, shampoos etc and use non flouride toothpaste! (these all contain carcinogenic chemicals....just look at the long lists of chemicals on their labels!)

Have you noticed an uptick in young people getting cancer? I have.....including recently the british female number 1 tennis payer (she was an extremely fit and healthy athlete)

Also have you noticed how they are making a lot of noise abouit alzeimers now? That's because they know that the stuff they are bombarding us with is going to affect us (not least of all the chemtrails)

 

[Kanamori]

[video=youtube;NrF5wWQ4hIU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NrF5wWQ4hIU[/video]

********************************

What do you guys think about a child determining their course of care. Is it right for someone so young to hold that power? Do they know the consequences and can they fully understand the impact of their actions? When is it neglect from the parents? When should the state step in? If we believe we have the choice to determine our care, is there an age limit?

This brings to mind the local injections of marijuana or some derivative that they have experimented with as cancer treatment. But I should just shush and let them irradiate people.

 

[say what]

Nice!

Ditch the chemo, go on a purely organic diet and take marijuana oil

Cancer is a fungus of the body

Salvestrols which are naturally occuring on fruit and vegetables fight fungal growth, but when the fruit and veg are sprayed with herbicides and pesticides it destroys the salvestrols

So EAT organic if you want the salvestrols

And for pity sake avoid the aspartame (nutrasweet) drinks, monosodium glutomate foods, E numbers and vaccines (especially ones containing thimerosol)

So your totally fine with her choosing not to take traditional medicine, regardless of her age and comprehension of these issues?

I'm very much for person-centred care, but I am surprised at the difficulty I am having with this. I'm not sure I feel comfortable with a child making such a major life decision!

 

[Flavus Aquila]

To make a right choice many things are required: adequate knowledge, understanding, wisdom, experience, etc.

Many day-to-day choices are not that important and are inconsequential, except insofar as they determine experience (positive and negative) and preferrence.


I think the state has some duty to protect people from making bad choices - for example, protecting people from false advertising, protecting the mentally disabled from being exploited, restraining the mentally ill from making decision which are contrary to their well-being, etc.

Children, IMHO need to be protected from making decisions which they cannot fully grasp. A child deciding to refuse cancer treatment might not fully appreciate what it is to grow into adulthood, to have the options of study, work, relationships, family, etc. They cannot fully choose whether to pursue life, or death, because they do not fully understand what the fullness of adult life is. Nevertheless, if a condition is too burdensome and has little prospect of success, then I think a child can ask that suffering not be prolonged artificially and request instead palliative care.

 

[muir]

So your totally fine with her choosing not to take traditional medicine, regardless of her age and comprehension of these issues?

I'm very much for person-centred care, but I am surprised at the difficulty I am having with this. I'm not sure I feel comfortable with a child making such a major life decision!

Yes she should have the choice to avoid chemo....chemo just zaps EVERYTHING

There are natural ways to fight cancer and there are ways to avoid the things that are giving people cancer

 

[Skarekrow]

The real question is:
What is the survivability in years.
Take my Father’s cancer for instance…esophageal adenocarcinoma…even if caught in stage one (his was stage four) the survivability rate is still just 5% for five years. So yes, it is survivable, (for five years) but would you rather spend that five years extremely sick from the chemo treatment, or would you rather spend a lesser amount of time feeling better but nonetheless still dying?
This little girl has already undergone chemo and knows what it entails…the cancer is still there.
If she undergoes chemo again…there is no guaranteeing that it will give her a longer time alive, but it will guarantee that she will be very ill during her remaining time.
She is dying…I say, let her choose how she wants to spend it, even if technically she isn’t an adult.

 

[Flavus Aquila]

The real question is:
What is the survivability in years.
Take my Father’s cancer for instance…esophageal adenocarcinoma…even if caught in stage one (his was stage four) the survivability rate is still just 5% for five years. So yes, it is survivable, (for five years) but would you rather spend that five years extremely sick from the chemo treatment, or would you rather spend a lesser amount of time feeling better but nonetheless still dying?
This little girl has already undergone chemo and knows what it entails…the cancer is still there.
If she undergoes chemo again…there is no guaranteeing that it will give her a longer time alive, but it will guarantee that she will be very ill during her remaining time.
She is dying…I say, let her choose how she wants to spend it, even if technically she isn’t an adult.

If chemo is mostly prolonging life, then do it.
If chemo is mostly prolonging suffering, then drop it.

Mind you, care must be taken that depression is not determining the choice, but that the choice is unencumbered by depression, or other mental illness - so that the choice is one that the person would agree with if things were good.

 

[La Sagna]

I do not believe that the family is making the right decision but I do believe that the CAS has made the right decision.

My cousin died of the same cancer when he was 19, many years ago, at that time the survival rate was very low and he lived for 5 years after diagnosis. Now however the survival rate of this cancer is very high and many children who have it go through treatment and go on to become adults with no trace of cancer. This is why I believe the family is not making the right decision although I do believe their hearts are in the right place.

The CAS is making the right decision because they have seen that this is a loving family with good intentions and tearing this girl away from her family or forcing her to take treatment against her will and that of her family would likely cause more damage to her physical and mental health than letting the family have their wishes. The stress would be bad for her health and if she was forced to take the treatment and survived the mental turmoil and the trauma that she would go through could possibly cause long-term emotional and mental issues.

I hope the family's treatments works, I suspect they may not, but she is better off dying young at peace than living a long life in emotional and mental turmoil.

 

[La Sagna]

The real question is:
What is the survivability in years.
Take my Father’s cancer for instance…esophageal adenocarcinoma…even if caught in stage one (his was stage four) the survivability rate is still just 5% for five years. So yes, it is survivable, (for five years) but would you rather spend that five years extremely sick from the chemo treatment, or would you rather spend a lesser amount of time feeling better but nonetheless still dying?
This little girl has already undergone chemo and knows what it entails…the cancer is still there.
If she undergoes chemo again…there is no guaranteeing that it will give her a longer time alive, but it will guarantee that she will be very ill during her remaining time.
She is dying…I say, let her choose how she wants to spend it, even if technically she isn’t an adult.

If I were old and the survivability rate was low I would not get treatment but if the survivability rate of somebody who is very young and has cancer is very good then I think they should take the treatment. The side-effects are terrible but will be short term in the context of a long life.

 

[say what]

What if this wasn't cancer and chemo - what if was another life altering choice, should an 11 year old be able to make those decisions? It is their body, but do they understand the longterm consequences? If in 10 years they regret their choice, who's fault is it? The parents? The child's? The state?

I battle with feeling comfortable that a child of such a young age understands the depths of some of these ideas. I'm not sure at 11 I understood death, or even my own health. I worry about her ability to understand consequences, but then again, perhaps that's my own age- maybe seeing it for what it is, and without the concern of consequences is important.

 

[muir]

What if this wasn't cancer and chemo - what if was another life altering choice, should an 11 year old be able to make those decisions? It is their body, but do they understand the longterm consequences? If in 10 years they regret their choice, who's fault is it? The parents? The child's? The state?

I battle with feeling comfortable that a child of such a young age understands the depths of some of these ideas. I'm not sure at 11 I understood death, or even my own health. I worry about her ability to understand consequences, but then again, perhaps that's my own age- maybe seeing it for what it is, and without the concern of consequences is important.

I think each situation needs to be assessed individually

What i'm saying here is that there are other options which can be explored other than chemo...i just hope this young girls family are aware of those options and uses them

People could spend lots of energy discussing the whys and wherefores about what age people are responsible for their decisions but even emotional maturity is going to vary with each person

Ultimately i think the energy would be better spent if everyone asked questions like ''why the hell are so many young people getting cancer''

because deciding your treatment is a 'cure' issue but prevention is better than cure and we need to be asking some searching questions in our society about the things we are being exposed to

If we don't ask those searching questions and find answers to them this girl whatever happens to her will just be one in a tidal wave of cases

 

[sprinkles]

A fresh melody can only be heard once.

 

[Cornerstone]

Well, it's not up to the child really.

The parents must have believed she was better off without chemotherapy and the state has eventually conceded.
I doubt they would have taken her off if they believed in its efficacy just because she was experiencing unpleasant side-effects.

Buuut...I agree with [MENTION=1871]muir[/MENTION]. Cannabis oil is well reported to have a dramatic impact on cancer.
I've heard David Icke speak about the fungus angle whilst the RSO (Rick Simpson Oil) people talk about the endo-cannabinoid system.

What I do know is that there are cannabinoids in breast milk, which is good enough for a human at its most fragile time.
I saw it in the medication handbook nurses use. Sativex being a cannabis-based legal pharmaceutical in the UK with an advisory about breastfeeding due to cannabinoids.

Chemo does work if it doesn't kill you. There are better options but you have to go renegade to get the most effective.
It depends where you're at. There are theories that all disease is mental in origin that manifests physically but that would make healing a deeply personal thing.
It's difficult with kids because the best way is probably cannabis which is illegal. So you're stuck between a rock and a hard place.
They may take your kids because you refused deadly chemo and you'll have to fight your case hard, even if you cure your child, to keep them after giving them DRUGS!!!

Again, what Muir said was right. Why are the kids getting cancer so frequently? Something is very wrong.

But in the meantime...cannabis.

 

[Eventhorizon]

Heres the thing about chemo. No one really knows if it works, who it works on and why is still unknown. If it wasn’t, it would be a cure for everyone. The basic premise of killing someone to kill the cancer is what it comes down to and it’s a bit medieval in my mind.
The girl shouldn’t be allowed to choose. However anyone saying that chemo is the best option out of all options just doesn’t know much about it. It’s a sad story all around.

 

[say what]

A close friend of mine, her mother was diagnosed with late stage pancreatic cancer last year. She's been through two rounds of chemo and is doing considerably well. They only thought she had a few months to live; but now things are looking great- she's planning vacations for the summer and fall!

I think chemo does work for some- I mean, I can't deny that something worked for her!

 

[Eventhorizon]

A close friend of mine, her mother was diagnosed with late stage pancreatic cancer last year. She's been through two rounds of chemo and is doing considerably well. They only thought she had a few months to live; but now things are looking great- she's planning vacations for the summer and fall!

I think chemo does work for some- I mean, I can't deny that something worked for her!

Right so a choice has to be made by each person going through it. The girl is 11, I suspect that she didnt really make the choice. Not really. If the chemo was working and the girl said she wanted to stop I bet it would be a different story.

When I was very sick I went to see a lot of doctors. I ended taking drug after prescribed drug though none of them could tell me what was wrong. "Here take this and see if it helps." I know the human body is complex but our medicine really just isnt that advanced in the 21st century.

I ahve heard storys about people going through chemo, it not working and then trying some alternative medicine that does work. Whos to say chemo really works on anyone and the cancer doesnt just go away on its own?

 

[say what]

Right so a choice has to be made by each person going through it. The girl is 11, I suspect that she didnt really make the choice. Not really. If the chemo was working and the girl said she wanted to stop I bet it would be a different story.

When I was very sick I went to see a lot of doctors. I ended taking drug after prescribed drug though none of them could tell me what was wrong. "Here take this and see if it helps." I know the human body is complex but our medicine really just isnt that advanced in the 21st century.

I ahve heard storys about people going through chemo, it not working and then trying some alternative medicine that does work. Whos to say chemo really works on anyone and the cancer doesnt just go away on its own?

I don't know, I think she decided it. She said Jesus came to her in a dream and told her she was cured. I guess we don't know enough of the family dynamics and inner workings of the situation to know how involved the parents were in the decision.

As I mentioned before, I'm very much a supporter of person-centered care, but I just wonder if at that age you understand the consequences. She's not allowed to vote, she's not allowed to drink, she can't rent R-rated movies, can't get a tattoo without her parents consent - yet she can decide her course of treatment?

 

[sprinkles]

I don't know, I think she decided it. She said Jesus came to her in a dream and told her she was cured. I guess we don't know enough of the family dynamics and inner workings of the situation to know how involved the parents were in the decision.

As I mentioned before, I'm very much a supporter of person-centered care, but I just wonder if at that age you understand the consequences. She's not allowed to vote, she's not allowed to drink, she can't rent R-rated movies, can't get a tattoo without her parents consent - yet she can decide her course of treatment?

It's not really her choice though since it was checked and they simply decided to not override it. It appears she never had the actual decision making power since they had to call it in and look at it.

Edit:
It's less of a choice and more like a suggestion which they accepted and called a choice.

 

[Flavus Aquila]

Heres the thing about chemo. No one really knows if it works, who it works on and why is still unknown. If it wasn’t, it would be a cure for everyone. The basic premise of killing someone to kill the cancer is what it comes down to and it’s a bit medieval in my mind.
The girl shouldn’t be allowed to choose. However anyone saying that chemo is the best option out of all options just doesn’t know much about it. It’s a sad story all around.

If there aren't distinct tumours, I always thought chemo was the only available treatment - assuming that the cancer is invisible to the immune system, and that gene specific therapy is not available.

What are the other options?