Connecticut teen with cancer forced by state to undergo chemo treatments
Connecticut teen with cancer forced by state to undergo chemo treatments
A 17-year-old cancer patient and her mother are locked in an unprecedented legal battle with the Connecticut state government over the teens right to refuse chemotherapy treatment, Fox CT reported.
The girl, identified only as Cassandra C." in court documents, was diagnosed with Hodgkins lymphoma in September. At the time, doctors at Connecticut Childrens Medical Center (CCMC) recommended she receive chemotherapy. After she refused treatment with her mothers support Connecticuts Department of Children and Families (DCF) stepped in.
According to the Hartford Courant, Cassandra believes chemotherapy can cause her as much or more damage as the cancer at this point. Hodgkin's lymphoma is a cancer of the lymphatic system. As it progresses, it compromises the body's ability to fight infection.
She knows the long-term effects of having chemo, what it does to your organs, what it does to your body. She may not be able to have children after this because it affects everything in your body. It not only kills cancer, it kills everything in your body, Cassandras mother, Jackie Fortin, said in a video published on the Hartford Courants website.
Cassandra was taken into temporary custody by DCF in November, and her mother was ordered to cooperate with medical care administered under the agencys supervision, after the hospital reported her to the agency.
Cassandra underwent two chemotherapy treatments before running away from home. When she returned, she refused treatment.
The teens doctors testified at a trial court hearing, after which it was decided that she was to be removed from her home and remain in DCF custody and that DCF was authorized to make medical decisions on her behalf.
Cassandra and her mother appealed the ruling and their case will be heard Thursday at the Connecticut Supreme Court in Hartford. The family claims that, by allowing DCF to use their judgment over that of Cassandras family, without the finding of incompetence on their behalf, the forced treatment violates the familys constitutional rights. Additionally, they claim that the state should recognize the mature minor doctrine that requires that a court first determine if a minor is not adequately mature enough to be allowed to make medical decisions on her own.
Its a question of fundamental constitutional rights-- the right to have a say over what happens to your body-- and the right to say to the government you cant control what happens to my body, Cassandras mothers attorney, Michael S. Taylor, told Fox CT. A public defender represents Cassandra.
According to Cassandra and her mother, Connecticuts common law and public policy dictate that DCF cannot force the teen to receive medical treatment over her and her mothers knowing and informed objection.
The Supreme Court of the state has never ruled on this issue, the Supreme Court of the United States has not ruled on this issue. So its very significant not just for our client, and for the minor child, but for the law in general, Taylor told the news channel.
Fortin told the Hartford Courant that even prior to her diagnosis, Cassandra would have opted not to undergo chemotherapy.
This is her decision, and shes very intelligent enough to make this decision on her own, Fortin said. She does not want poisons in her body, and she does not want to be forced through the state or the government to force her to do such a thing. And right now, at this moment, she is being forced chemo upon her against her wish.
Side effects of chemotherapy can include nausea, hair loss, vomiting, fatigue, and diarrhea, according to the National Cancer Institute.
"Connecticut Children's is working closely with the State of Connecticut Department of Children and Families in this matter," Bob Fraleigh, spokesman for the Connecticut Children's Medical Center, said in a statement to FoxNews.com. "We are grateful that the state Supreme Court has agreed to take on this very important case and we look forward to their guidance.
Tags
Who is online
50 visitors
Fortin told the Hartford Courant that even prior to her diagnosis, Cassandra would have opted not to undergo chemotherapy
I don't blame the kid one bit . Most cancer treatment is barbaric . Trying to get a straight answer to your questions is nearly impossible ...
Especially if her parents support her decision.
Hodgkins lymphoma is one of the most curable cancers there is with one of the lightest chemoregimen. And while I think that the state shouldn't step in at this age, I have to say, that I hope she really understands that without treatment, she will die.
Hard telling what caused her to make this decision.
It is because of this statement:
She is thinking in the long term... which the chance of that happening without the chemo is minimal. I think that her doctors are not informing her properly. For instance, she could still have children by saving her eggs. Instead of the state beating her over the head, how about someone sit down and explain the ins and outs of her treatment. Running away after her second treatment, sounds more like a frighten child, rather than an informed patient.
I'm guessing she got very sick from the round of treatment she tried ...
Personally speaking, I've wanted to give up a million times, but then I remembera time when I told my dad that I wanted to stop treatment. He let me know in a hundred different ways how my death would affect the people who love me.He told me that my life has value regardless of how sick I get. So even now, when my head is in the toilet, or I find my eyebrows on my pillow, Iknow that my fight isn't just about me. Both of my elderly and ill parents depend on me, and it gives me a reason to carry on.
Choosing death over side-effects is a child's argument.But perhaps more importantly, why would Ms. Fortin (or any other parent)lobby for the death of her child?Does she honestly think that her daughter's inevitable and painful, drawn-out deathwould be a more desirableoption? The sufferingCassandra willendure while waiting to die, far eclipses anything chemo can throw at her. Regarding Cassandra's fear about the possibility ofnot being able to have children: First, she doesn't know thatit will happen, and second,why in the world would she think of death as a remedyfor that fear?
Dinner-table perspective at the Fortin house:
Cassandra: Mom, can I go over to Sally's house and watch a movie?
Mom: Have you done your homework?
Cassandra: Uh, not all of it.
Mom: Then the answer is no.
Cassandra: Okay, then can I please die from an easily treatable illness because I might look yucky if my hair falls out?
Mom: Sure, honey. No problem as long as you finish your homework first.
Bottom line, if the doctors at Connecticut Children's Med Center felt that chemo would only prolong Cassandra's life by a year or two, and the majority of that time would be spent ill from treatment, they would not be interfering. But Hodgkin's is curable, especially in a patient as young as Cassandra. The younger the patient, the higher the cure rate.
A 17 year old is a young woman, and can make these decisions on her own, I think. Is it a fully informed decision? I don't know-- who sat down with her and told her she is going to die without treatment? Did anyone find out WHY she doesn't want the treatment, other than the poisons she is putting in her body?
That being said, I don't feel the state has the right to make decisions for her. She is just shy of her 18th birthday, and should be able to make her own decision. If she chooses death, well, that's her choice.
I truly feel we have to rearrange our thinking about death in this country. While this may be curable, the after effects may be so horrid, she doesn't want to live her life that way. I remember my poor grandmother, being tortured by treatment up to the moment of her death. It would have been much better for her had they just left her alone, eased her pain, and let her go. Of course, she was 85 and that's a big difference. I also know, too, that I will think long and hard about having another bypass surgery when that time comes, should I live long enough to need one.
I know the state is being well-meaning, but in my honest opinion, the DCF, etc. needs to butt out. This is a private family matter. The young woman is not being abused-- her mother is simply supporting her decision. I don't know that I could support my son in a decision of this nature. I'd want him alive at all costs-- even a piece of him alive...
Nor am I that sure that a few rounds of chemo will cure her. I know of quite a few people who took the chemo and died anyway. Didn't Jackie Kennedy Onassis die of this? I had a friend who had this and the chemo made it much better-- but he died from the chemo, anyway.
Thank you for shinning a different light on this subject.
I think she should have a right to control her own body. End of statement.
It is up to her doctors and parents to keep her informed, but as long as she is aware of the consequences, the control of her body should be hers. People are not property no matter what age they are.
My father chose to stop treatment after cancer metastasized to his pancreas and I respect that. I miss him dearly, but I respected that he chose 6 months of an okay-ish existence outside of a hospital as opposed to nine months of misery. His case was extreme and he spent the previous 12 years to that diagnosis getting periodic treatment after periodic treatment for his multiple myeloma, but he was informed and he made the decisions. There were treatments he refused throughout his ordeal and treatments he sought for himself.
If we allow the state to impose upon our own bodies medical procedures that we do not want, that is the ultimate in big brother government. I would staunchly defend everyone who seeks to keep government away from their body; even the anti-vax crowd (which I personally think are ill-informed and completely nuts). The best thing medical people can do is teach and provide guidance. Decisions are on the patient and we all should respect the decisions people make even if we think they are ill-informed or completely nuts.
This is her choice, DCF has no business getting involved. It is sad that she may not live to bear children, but sad things happen every day. Chemo is a harsh treatment. To some people, there may be things that are worse than death.
Miss,
No one is arguing in favor of letting the state decide for you... more like this is a case of bad parenting.
Your father was dying from an incurable disease. I can understand his choice totally. This kid isn't. Furthermore, she obviously thinks that she will live without treatment, since she is concern about having babies. Obviously something is wrong with this picture.
I totally agree with you Sister Mary.
This will allow the state to decide. If the Supreme court decides that the state is right to force this person to do chemo against her and her guardian's wishes... it is upholding the state's right to decide what is good for her and not herself or her parents.
If the state can decide what is right in this case, it can decide what is right in any case due to legal precedent.
My father spent 12 years deciding what he would and would not take, not just the end decision. He could have decided 12 years prior to that that he would not get complete back surgery, hip replacement x 2, knee replacement x2, chemo for months at a time, radiation, have his upper intestines and stomach rerouted because they died from radiation, have his arm worked on, have bariatric pressure treatment... the list is massive and extensive...
And while I would have missed him sooner, I saw him suffer. It was his choice to suffer to prolong his life.
Some people dont want to live suffering. There is nothing wrong with that decision. It is theirs not the state's decision.
Again... this case could use some more doctor discussion. I think the girl is foolish not to get treatment because in her case it could help her and the risks are more minimal than most... but it's HER decision. Not the state! As soon as we allow the state to make the decision, we no longer have exclusive rights over our own bodies.