{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by A84:
1/9/2015 12:45:34 AM
21
Thoughts on the Connecticut court ruling?
Today, a CT Supreme Court ruling upheld the state of Connecticut's decision to force a 17 year old girl by the name of Cassandra Calendar, who was diagnosed with Hodgkin's lymphoma, to go through chemotherapy for treatment of the illness.
In the state's argument, they claimed that the girl did not understand the severity of her prognosis and that she lacked competency extended to maturity.
She already ran away from joke after undergoing two treatments, as she believes the chemo will cause more damage than the cancer.
So, Flood, what's your opinion?
EDIT:
The third option is "the state has an obligation to treat anyone with terminal illnesses".
-
11 RepliesEdited by wpnott: 1/9/2015 3:59:14 AMTime to end this debate: Court rules that she will continue chemo treatment under [b]child welfare[/b] as she was tested and found immature and unable to make a decision of this magnitude. Doctors say with treatment she has a 80-85% survival rate and if she had not had the treatment she would have most likely died. The court added evidence of her missing appointments with the doctors which have been stated to be because of the mother. The mother is thought to have been coercing the 17 year old girl into this decision. "Really, the mother did all of the talking and sort of the fighting with the medical personnel. And so, really, the child stands in the shadow of her mother here. She's (the girl) not an independent decision maker." -from the article just to show how immature the girl is. Please read the full story: http://www.nbcnews.com/health/cancer/connecticut-teen-curable-cancer-must-continue-chemo-court-n282421
