Quote:
Originally Posted by calgarygeologist
I agree with you that children do need protection in some cases when parents shows neglect or can not care and provide for a child.
I do not agree that parent`s rights to make decisions for their families and children should be taken away because they don`t necessarily agree with a proposed method of treatment. We don`t need government to be stepping in and making decisions on every single case or every single matter.
There is a somewhat related flip side to this discussion and that is with regards to the government not providing care or treatment for sick kids. There have been recent cases in Canada where various treatments or drugs are not provided by the health care program which could save lives but the government won`t step up to the plate to support the families and take care of the costs. Why should the government be deciding who lives and who dies?
|
The parents choice was not between two differnet methods of treatment. They didn't disagree with a propsoed method of treatment.
Their choice was between treatment and no treatment.
They disagreed with
any treatment. Full stop!
Their choice was between a conventional treatment recomended by a qualifed team of doctors, who assessed the chances of success to be 75%, and a 100% certainty of death.
Part of being a parent is providing the necessities of life, in this case that would have been treatment. They purposely withheld that treatment, and as a result their daughter died.
__________________
THE SHANTZ WILL RISE AGAIN.

<-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!