- True chances -
- Mortality -
Hodgkin's kids -
authorities have the power to decide what type of medical
treatment is appropriate for your child's life-threatening
illness? And, if you don't agree, to take your child away -
possibly jailing you in the process - and
force that treatment upon your child? The
parents of 13-year old Daniel Hauser from Minnesota, suffering
from Hodgkin's lymphoma, are just learning that what they
think is best for their son doesn't count.
Of course, the answer to the above
questions would be easy if the government is backing a treatment
has nearly 100% success
limited delay of treatment involves serious health risk
has no dangerous side
no viable alternative
The reality is, unfortunately, usually
much less of a clean cut. In January 2009 Daniel's parents
learned that their son has Hodgkin's lymphoma, a deadly lymphatic
cancer if left untreated. Initially, they went along
with the recommended conventional treatment, which combines
radiation and chemotherapy.
After one round of
chemo in February, despite its positive results in
shrinking the tumor, the Hauser family became very concerned
with side effects of the harsh, toxic treatment, both immediate and long-term. They
decided to quit chemo in favor of "do no harm" natural
treatments (herbal supplements, vitamins, ionized/alkaline water
and other natural alternatives), including some traditional
American Indians' remedies.
However, after the hospital's oncologist informed
state's child protection services about treatment non-compliance, court
order was issued to the parents. In a desperate attempt to avoid
forced continuation of chemotherapy, the mother fled out of the
state with Daniel for six days. Court order was issued for her
arrest. The parents had two choices: either accept chemo,
or have their son taken away by the authorities.
So, in June this year, Danny was
chemo. It did, initially, shrink the tumor again, and, on the
negative side, it is poisoning Daniel's body, making him feeling seek and angry.
Are Daniel's parents justified in their
fear from chemo and radiation? The fact is that both are
which most often kill
Hodgkin lymphoma, but in the
process they poison the entire body. It
often makes patient feel miserably sick, and can have
serious health consequences longer-term -
That doesn't seem to agree with the
official picture of the treatment. Press articles cite doctors saying that
conventional treatment would give to Daniel "90%
chance of success", while without any treatment he would most likely die from
But what "90% chance of success" really
does mean? Plain 9 in 10 chances to beat Hodgkin's, fully
recover and live long and happy life? Or there is more to it
than this simplistic picture? Shouldn't we know that?
don't seem to be willing to talk about possible long-term
effects. Is it really all as good and clean as "90% chance of success"
imply, or there are also other legitimate concerns? How
close is the conventional pediatric treatment for Hodgkin's to the
conditions, listed in the beginning, that would make its legal
Following pages will attempt to
answer these burning questions.